Vachris v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Vachris v. State

553 So. 2d 375, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2835, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6852, 1989 WL 147984

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 8, 1989·No. No. 89-01001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Vachris pled no contest to grand theft and was put on probation. He was charged with violation of his probation and again pled no contest. The trial judge suspended Vachris’ driver’s license as part of the sentence and he appeals. The only point raised is the suspension of the driver’s license.

The state admits that the offense is not one for which the trial judge could suspend the license. However, the state also points out that there was evidence that an auto[376]*376mobile was used in the grand theft. In such a case, the trial court may forward the record of the conviction and the factual basis showing the use of the motor vehicle to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles which must revoke the driving privilege pursuant to Florida Statute 322.26(3) (1987).

Accordingly, we vacate that portion of Vachris’ sentence suspending his driver’s license, and remand for compliance with section 322.26. See Mandile v. State, 547 So.2d 1062 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Otherwise, affirmed.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PARKER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Vachris pled no contest to grand theft and was put on probation. He was charged with violation of his probation and again pled no contest. The trial judge suspended Vachris’ driver’s license as part of the sentence and he appeals. The only point raised is the suspension of the driver’s license.

The state admits that the offense is not one for which the trial judge could suspend the license. However, the state also points out that there was evidence that an auto[376]*376mobile was used in the grand theft. In such a case, the trial court may forward the record of the conviction and the factual basis showing the use of the motor vehicle to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles which must revoke the driving privilege pursuant to Florida Statute 322.26(3) (1987).

Accordingly, we vacate that portion of Vachris’ sentence suspending his driver’s license, and remand for compliance with section 322.26. See Mandile v. State, 547 So.2d 1062 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Otherwise, affirmed.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PARKER, JJ., concur.

Vachris v. State, 553 So. 2d 375, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2835, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6852, 1989 WL 147984 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

553 So. 2d 375 (Vachris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related