Prince v. State

641 So. 2d 496, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8367, 1994 WL 454877
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Prince v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 684 So. 2d 850
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 24, 1994·No. No. 94-805·Published

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We agree with the trial court that the more-than-three-year-old convictions of the defendant for which, as a then-seventeen-year-old, he was classified and sentenced under the Youthful Offender Act, sections 958.-011-15, Florida Statutes (1993), were not excludable as “juvenile dispositions” and were therefore properly scored in the guidelines computation as part of his “prior record.” See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(5) (1993) 1; Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(5)(G) (1993).2

In our view, the fact that youthful offender treatment requires, in the case of a person less than eighteen, a “transfer!] for prosecution to the criminal division of the circuit court,” § 958.04(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1993), precludes treating such a sentence as a “juvenile disposition.” Under section 39.053(4), in turn, true “juvenile dispositions” are adjudications of delinquency, which are “the equivalent of convictions” under Rule 3.701(d)(5)(G), not the actual Y.O.A. convictions with which we are here concerned.3

Affirmed.

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

Prince v. State, 641 So. 2d 496, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8367, 1994 WL 454877 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

641 So. 2d 496 (Prince v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.