From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 8, 2000
765 So. 2d 310 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

holding that the fact that a split sentence exceeds guideline range is irrelevant, because only incarcerative portion of sentence must fall within guideline range

Summary of this case from Sullivan v. State

Opinion

Case No. 5D00-1370

Opinion filed September 8, 2000 July Term 2000

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Stan Strickland, Judge.

Dean Johnson, Sneads, pro se

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Wesley Heidt, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.


Defendant, Dean Johnson, claims that he is entitled to be resentenced under Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla. 2000). Although defendant's offense was committed within the window period established in Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924 (Fla. 2000), defendant was not adversely affected by the application of the unconstitutional 1995 guidelines because his sentence of 77.7 months incarceration falls within the permitted range under the 1994 guidelines. The fact that his split sentence of incarceration followed by probation exceeds the guidelines range is irrelevant, as only the incarcerative portion of a sentence must fall within the guidelines range. See Carson v. State, 747 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), rev. denied, No. SC00-81 (Fla. May 22, 2000).

Defendant also claims that the Department of Corrections should be required to recalculate his gain-time. However, the proper remedy to correct a miscalculation of gain-time is to file an administrative complaint with the Department and, if dissatisfied with the results, to file a petition for writ of mandamus in the circuit court where the defendant is incarcerated to compel the Department to award the correct gain-time. See Green v. State, 698 So.2d 575 (Fla. 5th DCA), appeal dismissed, 705 So.2d 901 (Fla. 1997). Therefore, the trial court's order is affirmed but without prejudice to defendant seeking administrative relief regarding the calculation of gain-time.

AFFIRMED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO SEEK ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF.

HARRIS, SAWAYA and PLEUS, J.J., concur.


Summaries of

Johnson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 8, 2000
765 So. 2d 310 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

holding that the fact that a split sentence exceeds guideline range is irrelevant, because only incarcerative portion of sentence must fall within guideline range

Summary of this case from Sullivan v. State

stating that venue lies in the county where the prisoner is housed

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

Johnson v. State

Case Details

Full title:DEAN JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Sep 8, 2000

Citations

765 So. 2d 310 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Toomajan v. State

The fact that the trial court could have imposed a shorter term of community control is irrelevant under…

Sullivan v. State

Therefore, it is a legal sentence. See Johnson v. State, 765 So.2d 310 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (holding that the…