Marion v. State
| Decision Date | 02 July 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-2580,90-2580 |
| Parties | Jeremiah MARION, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. 582 So.2d 115, 16 Fla. L. Week. D1744 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Bruce A. Rosenthal, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Marc E. Brandes, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and GERSTEN, JJ.
Jeremiah Marion appeals a sentence imposed upon revocation of probation. We reverse.
Marion was convicted and sentenced in May 1988. In October 1990, while Marion was serving his probation for the May 1988 conviction, he was charged with two counts of selling cocaine. Marion entered into a plea agreement with the state, agreeing to plead guilty to the second count and to be sentenced as an habitual offender. In exchange for the guilty plea, the state consented to nolle prosequi the first count and agreed to a "60-month cap" on Marion's prison sentence.
Upon Marion's conviction for the October 1990 offense, the trial court implemented the plea agreement, found Marion to be an habitual offender, and sentenced him to serve five years in prison. Additionally, based on the October 1990 conviction, the court found Marion in violation of his probation imposed for the May 1988 offense and revoked the probation, sentencing Marion to five years in prison as an habitual offender.
Marion's guidelines scoresheet range for the May 1988 conviction, including the enhancement for violation of probation, was three and a half to four and a half years. Marion argues on appeal that the court erred in imposing a sentence in excess of the guidelines and in declaring him an habitual offender without making the findings required under section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1987). Marion asserts that the trial court mistakenly applied section 775.084 Chapter 88-131, section 6, Laws of Florida, which became effective October 1, 1988, after his May 1988 conviction. We agree.
"[V]iolation of probation results in revocation of probation and resentencing on the original offense." Irizarry v. State, 16 F.L.W. D967 (Fla. 3d DCA April 9, 1991) (on rehearing). The date of the original offense determines the applicable statute for sentencing. Marion committed the original offense for which probation was revoked prior to October 1, 1988. Thus, section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1987), governs Marion's habitual offender status...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shields v. State
...defendant for the original offense, not for the conduct constituting the violation. See Lambert, 545 So. 2d at 841 ; Marion v. State, 582 So. 2d 115, 116 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) ("[V]iolation of probation results in revocation of probation and resentencing on the original offense." (alteration i......
-
Owens v. State, No. 1D20-540
...after a revocation of probation is, for all intents and purposes, just a resentencing on the original offense"); Marion v. State , 582 So. 2d 115, 116 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) ("The date of the original offense determines the applicable statute for sentencing.").If, as the State argues, the 2019 ......
-
Gordon v. State, 94-0547
...Fla.Stat. (1985).2 The date of Gordon's 1986 burglary offense determines the applicable statute for sentencing. See Marion v. State, 582 So.2d 115, 116 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). See also DeAngelis v. State, 605 So.2d 175, 176 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Sentencing Gordon within the permitted range witho......
-
Bradley v. State, 94-110
...Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee. HARRIS, Chief Judge. See Atkinson v. State, 626 So.2d 1094 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Marion v. State, 582 So.2d 115 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. ...