Pioquinto v. State

656 So. 2d 552, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6281, 1995 WL 340675
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 9, 1995·No. No. 93-03414·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

BLUE, Judge.

Moisés Pioquinto appeals his convictions and sentences for manslaughter and aggravated battery. We affirm the convictions. However, we agree with Pioquinto that his sentences are improper and, therefore, reverse and remand for resentencing.

Pioquinto was sentenced within the guidelines as follows: count one — manslaughter— fourteen years in prison; count two — aggravated battery — three years minimum mandatory prison sentence, consecutive to count one. It was error for the sentences to be structured so that Pioquinto serves the mandatory sentence at the end of his total prison term. This situation deprives Pioquinto of the possible benefit of control release on the nonmandatory portion of his sentence. See Ricardo v. State, 608 So.2d 93 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Therefore, we reverse the sentences. On remand, the sentences shall be reimposed so that the minimum mandatory sentence is served first.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for resentencing.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pioquinto v. State, 656 So. 2d 552, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6281, 1995 WL 340675 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

656 So. 2d 552 (Pioquinto v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gregory L. Mattox Jr. v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2019
Daniels v. State
664 So. 2d 366 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
LaFleur v. State
661 So. 2d 346 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)