Holland v. State, BF-209
| Decision Date | 18 March 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. BF-209,BF-209 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 675 Bush Wade HOLLAND, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
We grant the appellee's motion for rehearing, vacate the prior opinion, and substitute the following:
This is an appeal of the trial court's denial of appellant's motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule. 3.850, Fla.R.Crim.P. We affirm.
The appellant in this case was originally charged with DWI manslaughter (Count I), manslaughter (Count II), leaving the scene of an accident (Count III), and driving with a suspended or revoked license (Count IV), all alleged to have occurred on July 28, 1984. The second count (manslaughter) was nolle prossed and appellant pled nolo contendere to Counts I, III, and IV. A sentencing guidelines scoresheet was then prepared, reflecting a total of 150 points and a recommended range of seven to twelve years incarceration. Defendant was sentenced on December 5, 1984 to twelve years incarceration on Count I to be followed by a three-year term of probation (to expire on July 28, 1999), five years probation on Count III (to expire on July 28, 2004), and one year probation on Count IV (to expire on July 28, 2005). As grounds for departure, the lower court attached a "laundry list" from which he checked off several "aggravating circumstances" and added a hand-written note under the section entitled "other reasons." Appellant was also ordered to make restitution in the amounts of $46,462.75 and $249.65.
No direct appeal was filed. A first motion for post-conviction relief was filed raising, as grounds, that there was no statutory provision under section 316.1931 relating to manslaughter. That motion was denied on January 4, 1985 without a hearing. Defendant then filed the instant motion for post-conviction relief raising, as grounds: (1) that the scoring of 16 points for an additional offense at conviction was erroneous since the charge was nolle prossed by the State; (2) that the court imposed an excessive split sentence; and (3) that the restitution order was invalid because no hearing was held on the matter. The second motion was also denied without a hearing, the trial court finding the motion to be without merit and facially deficient. We affirm the denial.
First, we find the argument regarding the restitution order to be without merit. A trial court must either give a defendant prior notice that the issue of restitution will be raised at the sentencing hearing or, if the issue is raised at the hearing without defendant having been given prior notice and the defendant objects or otherwise contests the proposed restitution, the trial judge must continue the hearing for a reasonable time and allow the defendant to be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reynolds v. State
...remand for further proceedings consistent with sections 775.089(1)(a) & (6) and 948.03(1), Florida Statutes (1989). See Holland v. State, 485 So.2d 471 (1st DCA 1986), pet. for rev. den., 508 So.2d 5 (Fla.1987); Laster v. State, 587 So.2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Wilson v. State, 407 So.2d ......
-
Holland v. State, 68605
...Atty. Gen. and Gregory G. Costas, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent. PER CURIAM. We have for review Holland v. State, 485 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), because of apparent conflict with State v. Chaplin, 490 So.2d 52 (Fla.1986). Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Bush Wade Holland was ori......
-
Brooks v. State
...hearing. Butts v. State, 575 So.2d 1379 (Fla. 5th DCA1991); Haines v. State, 571 So.2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA1990); Holland v. State, 485 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA1986), rev. denied, 508 So.2d 5 DOWNEY, GUNTHER and WARNER, JJ., concur. ...
-
Upton v. State, BL-177
...Upton, pro se. No appearance for appellee. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Wahl v. State, 460 So.2d 579 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Holland v. State, 485 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). MILLS, WIGGINTON and NIMMONS, JJ., ...