From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Destra v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
May 17, 1995
672 So. 2d 822 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

Opinion

No. 94-1672.

May 17, 1995.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County; Jeffrey Rosinek, Judge.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Samek Besser and Lawrence E. Besser, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Linda S. Katz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ.


CONFESSION OF ERROR


The sole issue on this appeal involves the appellant's sentence as a habitual violent felony offender. The crimes of which he was convicted in this case occurred while Destra was on community control, after adjudication was withheld, for a previous offense. He argues, and the state concedes, that Overstreet v. State, 629 So.2d 125 (Fla. 1993), requires reversal of the sentence. We agree. In Overstreet, the Supreme Court specifically held that section 775.084(2), Florida Statutes (1991), which provides that "placing of a person on probation without an adjudication of guilt shall be treated as a prior conviction" for habitual sentencing purposes, does not apply when the defendant is actually incarcerated at the time of the subsequent offense. Since actual imprisonment presents an a fortiori situation to community control, Overstreet plainly controls. Smith v. State, 651 So.2d 1218 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Accordingly, the habitual violent felony offender sentence is reversed and the cause remanded for resentencing. The convictions are affirmed.


Summaries of

Destra v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
May 17, 1995
672 So. 2d 822 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
Case details for

Destra v. State

Case Details

Full title:RONALD DESTRA A/K/A RONALD DESTRA, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: May 17, 1995

Citations

672 So. 2d 822 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

Citing Cases

Suarez v. State

Lastly, the State agrees with the defendant that case number 91-3586 does not qualify as a prior conviction…

May v. State

Previous decisions have construed this subsection narrowly, and determined that because it specifically…