Rosa-Sanchez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Rosa-Sanchez v. State

561 So. 2d 25, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3300, 1990 WL 62863

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 15, 1990

DocketNo. 89-2539

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 561 So. 2d 25 (Rosa-Sanchez v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rosa-Sanchez v. State, 561 So. 2d 25, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3300, 1990 WL 62863 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Finding no merit in appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in revoking his probation for providing an incorrect address to a probation officer, providing false information to the community control office, and failing to report to his community control officer, McPherson v. State, 530 So.2d 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Bass v. State, 473 So.2d 1367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), we affirm the revocation of probation.

The state concedes that the trial court erred in sentencing defendant in excess of the statutory maximum. Where the guidelines sentence “exceeds the maximum sentence provided by statute for that offense, the statutory maximum sentence should be imposed.” Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(10); Sears v. State, 539 So.2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). Consequently, we remand for resentencing.

Probation revocation affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

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

PER CURIAM.

Finding no merit in appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in revoking his probation for providing an incorrect address to a probation officer, providing false information to the community control office, and failing to report to his community control officer, McPherson v. State, 530 So.2d 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Bass v. State, 473 So.2d 1367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), we affirm the revocation of probation.

The state concedes that the trial court erred in sentencing defendant in excess of the statutory maximum. Where the guidelines sentence “exceeds the maximum sentence provided by statute for that offense, the statutory maximum sentence should be imposed.” Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(10); Sears v. State, 539 So.2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). Consequently, we remand for resentencing.

Probation revocation affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

561 So. 2d 25, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3300, 1990 WL 62863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosa-sanchez-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack