Hudson v. State
| Decision Date | 29 August 2008 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D07-6590.,1D07-6590. |
| Citation | 989 So.2d 725 |
| Parties | Shallist Thomas HUDSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy Daniels, Public Defender, and Terry Carley, Assistant Public Defender, Office of the Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Michael T. Kennett, Assistant Attorney General, and Thomas Winokur, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Shallist Thomas Hudson appeals the trial court's order revoking his probation. He contends that his seven-year sentence exceeds the six-year cap of section 958.14, Florida Statutes (2003), because he is a youthful offender and committed technical rather than substantive violations. The state concedes error. We reverse.
Hudson was convicted of multiple felonies and sentenced in 2004 as a youthful offender. He violated probation in 2007 by changing his residence without permission and by failing to remain at home for a scheduled visit from his probation officer. The court revoked Hudson's probation and youthful-offender status and sentenced him as an adult to two years of community control followed by five years of probation, concluding that the second sentence of section 958.14, below, applies only when a court imposes a sentence of incarceration, because a combined sentence of community control and probation does not commit a defendant to "the custody of the department." Because the trial court exceeded the sentence allowed by the first sentence of the provision, we need not address the second sentence.
Section 958.14 provides:
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. 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 or she was found guilty, with credit for time served while incarcerated, or for a technical or nonsubstantive violation for a period longer than 6 years or for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he or she was found guilty, whichever is less, with credit for time served while incarcerated.
When a defendant has been designated a youthful offender, the court may not change that status by way of revocation of probation or community control. See State v. Watts, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eustache v. State
...v. State , 160 So.3d 496, 496 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ; Jacques v. State , 95 So.3d 419, 420-21 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) ; Hudson v. State , 989 So.2d 725, 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). It was the Arnette majority's statement that a defendant always retains his or her "youthful offender status" after viola......
-
Yegge v. State
...v. State, 95 So.3d 419, 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) ; Christian v. State, 84 So.3d 437, 441–42 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) ; Hudson v. State, 989 So.2d 725, 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). As we explained in Yegge, "[a] youthful offender designation carries benefits—including the availability of programs and f......
- Blacker v. State
- Blacker v. State Of Fla.
-
Judgment and sentence
...remove the YO designation and place him back on adult probation or community control. The provisions of §958.14 control. Hudson v. State, 989 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) Second District Court of Appeal Defendant was ineligible for youthful offender sentencing for the armed (firearm) burg......