Schimpf v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Schimpf v. State

717 So. 2d 165, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 11641, 1998 WL 635275

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 16, 1998

DocketNo. 98-2290

StatusPublished

This text of 717 So. 2d 165 (Schimpf 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

Schimpf v. State, 717 So. 2d 165, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 11641, 1998 WL 635275 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant claimed in his motion to correct sentence that his total split sentence of four years of imprisonment followed by four years of probation for the third degree felony of grand theft exceeded the five year statutory maximum and was therefore illegal. See Davis v. State, 661 So.2d 1193, 1196 (Fla. 1995). While the state agreed, the trial court mistakenly entered an order correcting a different sentence, which was ordered to run concurrently with the illegal sentence.

We remand the case for the trial court to resentence appellant in connection with Count I of case number 94-1044. The new sentence for that count shall not exceed five years.

WARNER, POLEN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant claimed in his motion to correct sentence that his total split sentence of four years of imprisonment followed by four years of probation for the third degree felony of grand theft exceeded the five year statutory maximum and was therefore illegal. See Davis v. State, 661 So.2d 1193, 1196 (Fla. 1995). While the state agreed, the trial court mistakenly entered an order correcting a different sentence, which was ordered to run concurrently with the illegal sentence.

We remand the case for the trial court to resentence appellant in connection with Count I of case number 94-1044. The new sentence for that count shall not exceed five years.

WARNER, POLEN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

717 So. 2d 165, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 11641, 1998 WL 635275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schimpf-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack