Wilcher v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wilcher v. State

388 So. 2d 320, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17182

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 17, 1980

DocketNo. 80-841

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 388 So. 2d 320 (Wilcher 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

Wilcher v. State, 388 So. 2d 320, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17182 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

COBB, Judge.

The appellant, Wesley Wilcher, filed a motion with the trial court for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 3.850, alleging that the trial court had imposed a sentence in excess of the maximum authorized by law. Defendant, following his conviction of a second degree felony,¹ was sentenced to five years imprisonment to be followed by ten years probation.

Wilcher argued that this split sentence deprived the Parole and Probation Commission of its lawful power to grant paroles, and relied on various Florida cases: Geter v. Wainwright, 380 So.2d 1203 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Olcott v. State, 378 So.2d 303 (Fla.2d DCA 1979); Cooney v. State, 376 So.2d 926 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); Shead v. State, 367 So.2d 264 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); State v. Williams, 237 So.2d 69 (Fla.2d DCA 1970); The trial court denied the motion and Wilcher has filed a timely appeal pursuant to Rule 9.140(g), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The state contends, and we agree, that section 948.01(4), Florida Statutes (1979), specifically authorizes the sentence imposed in this case. State v. Holmes, 360 So.2d 380 (Fla. 1978); Hicks v. State, 362 So.2d 173 (Fla.lst DCA 1978).

AFFIRMED.

FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr. and SHARP, JJ., concur.

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

COBB, Judge.

The appellant, Wesley Wilcher, filed a motion with the trial court for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 3.850, alleging that the trial court had imposed a sentence in excess of the maximum authorized by law. Defendant, following his conviction of a second degree felony,¹ was sentenced to five years imprisonment to be followed by ten years probation.

Wilcher argued that this split sentence deprived the Parole and Probation Commission of its lawful power to grant paroles, and relied on various Florida cases: Geter v. Wainwright, 380 So.2d 1203 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Olcott v. State, 378 So.2d 303 (Fla.2d DCA 1979); Cooney v. State, 376 So.2d 926 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); Shead v. State, 367 So.2d 264 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); State v. Williams, 237 So.2d 69 (Fla.2d DCA 1970); The trial court denied the motion and Wilcher has filed a timely appeal pursuant to Rule 9.140(g), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The state contends, and we agree, that section 948.01(4), Florida Statutes (1979), specifically authorizes the sentence imposed in this case. State v. Holmes, 360 So.2d 380 (Fla. 1978); Hicks v. State, 362 So.2d 173 (Fla.lst DCA 1978).

AFFIRMED.

FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr. and SHARP, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

388 So. 2d 320, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilcher-v-state-fladistctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack