Sands v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sands v. State

313 So. 2d 116, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14895

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 27, 1975

DocketNo. 74-1340

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 313 So. 2d 116 (Sands 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

Sands v. State, 313 So. 2d 116, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14895 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Ronald Sands, appeals a sentence to five years in the state penitentiary imposed by the trial judge after a probation revocation hearing.

Sands alleges that it was error to revoke probation and impose such sentence since the trial judge originally placed him on five years probation with the condition that he “must start drug program, if available, in county jail. Must be enrolled in drug program by probation office after one (1) year served in county jail,” which Sands claims is illegal.

We acknowledge that a sentence imposing one year in county jail as a condition of probation is illegal, and we have been definitive as to the invalidity of such sentences. See Williams v. State, Fla.App. 1973, 280 So.2d 518 and Durham v. State, Fla.App.1974, 304 So.2d 146. However, we agree with the State’s contention that in this case, the facts do not fall under the Williams or Durham rationale. The defendant’s argument is based upon the inaccurate factual representation that one year in the county jail is a condition of probation. The record reflects that the defendant had been sentenced to serve one year in county jail in another case and that “one year served in county jail” mentioned by the court in the order of probation in this case merely defines the time when the condition of enrolling in the drug program must begin. Thus, the probation was ordered for five years only, with no sentence to county jail. Probation in one case to follow a jail sentence in another case is valid. Dade County v. Baker, Fla.1972, 265 So.2d 700.

In addition, we note that before this appeal from the order revoking probation and imposing a sentence of five years in the state penitentiary, Sands never filed a timely appeal or other challenge to the legality of the order placing him on probation.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Ronald Sands, appeals a sentence to five years in the state penitentiary imposed by the trial judge after a probation revocation hearing.

Sands alleges that it was error to revoke probation and impose such sentence since the trial judge originally placed him on five years probation with the condition that he “must start drug program, if available, in county jail. Must be enrolled in drug program by probation office after one (1) year served in county jail,” which Sands claims is illegal.

We acknowledge that a sentence imposing one year in county jail as a condition of probation is illegal, and we have been definitive as to the invalidity of such sentences. See Williams v. State, Fla.App. 1973, 280 So.2d 518 and Durham v. State, Fla.App.1974, 304 So.2d 146. However, we agree with the State’s contention that in this case, the facts do not fall under the Williams or Durham rationale. The defendant’s argument is based upon the inaccurate factual representation that one year in the county jail is a condition of probation. The record reflects that the defendant had been sentenced to serve one year in county jail in another case and that “one year served in county jail” mentioned by the court in the order of probation in this case merely defines the time when the condition of enrolling in the drug program must begin. Thus, the probation was ordered for five years only, with no sentence to county jail. Probation in one case to follow a jail sentence in another case is valid. Dade County v. Baker, Fla.1972, 265 So.2d 700.

In addition, we note that before this appeal from the order revoking probation and imposing a sentence of five years in the state penitentiary, Sands never filed a timely appeal or other challenge to the legality of the order placing him on probation.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

313 So. 2d 116, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sands-v-state-fladistctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack