Hill v. State, 96-1403
| Decision Date | 25 April 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 96-1403,96-1403 |
| Citation | 692 So.2d 277 |
| Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D1070 Terrance HILL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Lyle Hitchens, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and David H. Foxman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Terrance D. Hill appeals the sentence imposed following a probation violation. In 1992, Hill pled nolo contendere to third degree murder with a firearm and was sentenced as a youthful offender to a negotiated four year term of imprisonment followed by two years probation. He violated his probation by driving with a suspended license and by failing to pay the monthly costs of supervision. As a result, the trial court sentenced Hill to seventeen years imprisonment, suspended upon successful completion of three years supervised probation. Hill argues that because he was originally sentenced as a youthful offender, his sentence could not exceed six years. 1 However, section 958.14, Florida Statutes (1991), permits sentences in excess of the six-year cap for youthful offenders who commit substantive violations of probation. 2 Moreover, this provision was in effect in 1992 when Hill committed the underlying offense and thus, is not an impermissible ex post facto law, as Hill suggests. Cf. Reeves v. State, 605 So.2d 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
AFFIRMED.
1 § 958.04(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1991).
2 Section 958.14, Florida Statutes (1991), provides, in pertinent part:
A violation or alleged violation of probation or the terms of a community control program shall subject the youthful offender to the provisions of s. 948.06(1). However, no youthful offender shall be committed to the custody of the department for a substantive violation for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he was found guilty....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Meeks
...3d DCA 2000); Johnson v. State, 736 So.2d 708 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Robinson v. State, 702 So.2d 1346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Hill v. State, 692 So.2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Johnson v. State, 678 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Dunbar v. State, 664 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Reeves v. State,......
-
Goldwire v. State
...[is] not limited to a youthful offender sentence.” Willis v. State, 744 So.2d 1265, 1266 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (citing Hill v. State, 692 So.2d 277, 278 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (stating that a trial court is permitted to exceed youthful offender maximum sentences); Johnson v. State, 678 So.2d 934......
-
Cooper v. State
...the court to impose a minimum mandatory term. Further, the reasoning in Christian comports with our prior holdings in Hill v. State, 692 So.2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (explaining youthful offender would be sentenced in excess of 6–year cap for substantive probation violation), and Kelly v. ......
-
VICTORINO v. State, 5D03-192.
...PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. State v. Meeks, 789 So.2d 982 (Fla.2001); Carter v. State, 786 So.2d 1173, 1180-81 (Fla.2001); Hill v. State, 692 So.2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). GRIFFIN, SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ., ...