Slingbaum v. State, 99-03121.
| Decision Date | 29 December 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-03121.,99-03121. |
| Citation | 751 So.2d 89 |
| Parties | Edward A. SLINGBAUM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Edward A. Slingbaum appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We find merit only in Slingbaum's claim that the trial court was without jurisdiction to sentence him for violating his probation on certain third-degree felonies because the probationary period had expired before the appropriate steps were taken to revoke the probation. See State v. Hall, 641 So.2d 403 (Fla.1994).
Slingbaum alleges, and the State apparently conceded below,1 that his probationary period had expired before the State took the necessary steps to revoke his probation. If this is in fact the case, then the trial court was without jurisdiction to sentence Slingbaum. See Hall, 641 So.2d at 404 () (quoting Carroll v. Cochran, 140 So.2d 300, 301 (Fla.1962)).
The First and Fourth Districts have held that such a claim is cognizable in a rule 3.800 proceeding. See Jett v. State, 722 So.2d 211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Wilson v. State, 698 So.2d 1380 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Although we agree that such a claim states a basis for relief under rule 3.800(a), provided that the error is apparent from the face of the record and requires no evidentiary hearing, we cannot agree with the reasoning of the majority opinion in Jett that such an error constitutes a violation of double jeopardy. See Jett, 722 So.2d at 212. We adopt, instead, the reasoning of Judge Benton's concurrence in that case and hold that where it can be determined without an evidentiary hearing that a sentence has been imposed by a court without jurisdiction, that sentence is illegal, whatever its length. See id. at 214 (Benton, J., concurring in result).
Therefore, we reverse the trial court's order as to this claim. On remand, the trial court shall determine whether the revocation process was set in motion prior to the expiration of Slingbaum's probationary period.2 If such steps were not taken timely, the trial court shall vacate Slingbaum's sentences as to those convictions. If the trial court again denies Slingbaum's motion, it shall attach record documents which conclusively demonstrate that revocation proceedings were timely instituted. We affirm the trial court order as to Slingbaum's other claims.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded.
1. In its response filed below, the State conceded that "it would appear that the defendant is correct in that the ... sentence had already run." The State has chosen not to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sepulveda v. State, 2D05-1276.
...the warrant is issued when the judge signs it. Morgan v. State, 757 So.2d 618, 619 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 90 n. 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). With respect to the timeliness of allegations in the successive affidavits of violation filed in this case, allegations o......
-
Hernandez v. State, 2D03-3586.
...person of the probationer unless in the meantime the processes of the court have been set in motion for revocation." Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (quoting State v. Hall, 641 So.2d 403, 404 (Fla.1994)). The State did not set "the processes of the court" in motion u......
-
Hennig v. Prummell, 2D15–1315.
...person of the probationer unless in the meantime the processes of the court have been set in motion for revocation.” Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (quoting State v. Hall, 641 So.2d 403, 404 (Fla.1994) ).But Mr. Hennig's probation did not expire. His term of probati......
-
Stapler v. State, 5D06-1961.
...that the sentence has been imposed by a court without jurisdiction and does not require an evidentiary hearing. See Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Jett v. State, 722 So.2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Wilson v. State, 698 So.2d 1380, 1381-82 (Fla. 4th DCA From the......
-
This court has no jurisdiction a look at probation and community control revocation proceedings in light of Boyd and F.S. s. 901.02(1).
...Amendment Retroactive? The Second District Court of Appeal has since agreed with and cited to McNeal in the case of Slingbaum v. State, 751 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). However, the two opinions may still leave criminal defense practitioners with some questions about the applicability of t......