From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Huff v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 26, 1996
672 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Summary

holding that even though the appellant's original suspended sentence may have been improper, it was not reversible error because the appellant received the benefits of the improper sentence

Summary of this case from Lightfoot v. State

Opinion

No. 95-2666.

April 26, 1996.

An appeal from the circuit court for Escambia County. Michael Jones, Judge.

Clarence Eugene Huff, Pro Se.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and James W. Rogers, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


This Anders appeal arises from an order of the lower court finding Appellant in violation of his probation and community control. We affirm the finding that Appellant violated Condition 11 of his community control by failing to be at his approved residence. We reverse, however, the finding that Appellant violated probation in lower court case 94-4723. The record before us does not indicate whether the State charged or proved a violation of the conditions of Appellant's probation, as opposed to community control. Therefore, on remand, the trial court shall reconsider the finding of violation of probation.

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

As to Appellant's sentence for aggravated battery, we hold that although his original suspended sentence may have been improper under Poore v. State, 531 So.2d 161 (Fla. 1988), it is not reversible on this appeal because Appellant has already received the benefits of the improper sentence. Gaskins v. State, 607 So.2d 475 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Nevertheless, we must reverse and remand because we are unable to determine from the record whether Appellant was credited with time served on community control under the rule stated in Warrington v. State, 660 So.2d 385 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). On remand, the trial court shall determine and state on the record the amount of credit for time served on community control.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.

BOOTH, JOANOS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Huff v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 26, 1996
672 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

holding that even though the appellant's original suspended sentence may have been improper, it was not reversible error because the appellant received the benefits of the improper sentence

Summary of this case from Lightfoot v. State

finding improper sentence is not reversible on appeal after violation of probation

Summary of this case from Jackson v. State
Case details for

Huff v. State

Case Details

Full title:CLARENCE EUGENE HUFF, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Apr 26, 1996

Citations

672 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Citing Cases

White v. State

Where a defendant has taken advantage of an illegal sentence to obtain an immediate release from…

State v. Ortiz

Where a defendant has already served his sentence and he has reaped the benefit of an illegal sentence, he is…