Eubanks v. State, 95-2466

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
Citation662 So.2d 1360
Parties20 Fla. L. Weekly D2572 Corey A. EUBANKS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 95-2466,95-2466
Decision Date22 November 1995

Page 1360

662 So.2d 1360
20 Fla. L. Weekly D2572
Corey A. EUBANKS, Appellant,
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 95-2466.
District Court of Appeal of Florida,
Third District.
Nov. 22, 1995.

An appeal under Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(g) from the Circuit Court for Dade County; Amy N. Dean, Judge.

Corey A. Eubanks, in proper person.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Fredericka Sands, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.



By way of a motion to correct an illegal sentence brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800, appellant Corey Eubanks challenges the validity of four concurrent split sentences of five years imprisonment followed by one year probation, pronounced after appellant pled guilty to four counts of various third degree felonies. No enhanced penalty was sought by the State or imposed by the court, despite appellant's 60 prior felony convictions. Because this sentence exceeds the five-year maximum provided by section 775.082(3)(d), Florida Statutes, this cause must be reversed and remanded for resentencing. E.g., Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(10); State v. Holmes, 360 So.2d 380, 383 (Fla.1978); Kline v. State, 642 So.2d 1146 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Milbry v. State, 469 So.2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), opinion adopted, 476 So.2d 1281, 1282 (Fla.1985); see also Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(12) Commission Notes (1988) ("The total sanction (incarceration and probation) shall not exceed the term

Page 1361

provided by general law."). The trial court is further directed to clarify whether this sentence is to run concurrent with or consecutive to time being served by appellant at the time of his original sentencing.

Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • M.P. v. State, No. 86968
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • October 10, 1996 other firearm-related offenses based upon the statutory language in section 790.22(7), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994). 3 M.P., 662 So.2d at 1360. The district court further explained that the offenses in question also satisfy the Blockburger 4 test as each offense requires proof of an elem......
  • K.W. v. State, No. 87235
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • October 31, 1996
    ...So.2d at 384. In M.P., the district court certified conflict with the opinions in A.J.H. and M.P.C. on the double jeopardy issue. M.P., 662 So.2d at 1360. After reviewing M.P., we concluded that dual adjudications for the offenses of carrying a concealed weapon and illegal possession of a f......
  • Bover v. State, No. 96-112
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • April 10, 1996
    ...maximum for state supervision. § 775.082(3)(c), Fla.Stat. (1993); Rule 3.701(d)(10) Fla.R.Crim.P.; see also, e.g., Eubanks v. State, 662 So.2d 1360 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). 2 Since appellant has apparently completed Page 830 his five year prison term imposed for these three cases, we remand with......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT