Tatum v. State, 98-1341.
| Decision Date | 27 May 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 98-1341.,98-1341. |
| Citation | 736 So.2d 1214 |
| Parties | Michael TATUM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; James W. Rogers, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Laura Fullerton Lopez, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
In this direct criminal appeal, appellant contends that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke his probation and to sentence him to ten months in the county jail because the probation revocation process was not commenced until after his probationary term had expired. We agree and, accordingly, reverse.
In Boyd v. State, 699 So.2d 295, 298 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), this court certified to the supreme court as a question of great public importance the following:
That question was answered in the affirmative by a unanimous supreme court. State v. Boyd, 717 So.2d 524 (Fla.1998).
In this case, the state concedes that the arrest warrant was not delivered to the sheriff until after appellant's probationary term had expired. Notwithstanding that fact, the state argues that the trial court had jurisdiction because an affidavit alleging that appellant had violated his probation was filed before the end of appellant's probationary term. As the supreme court's answer to the question posed by this court in Boyd clearly establishes, when the affidavit alleging a violation of probation or community control is filed is legally irrelevant; the determinative event for purposes of commencing the revocation process is delivery of the arrest warrant to the sheriff for execution. Accordingly, the state's argument is without merit.
The revocation process was not timely commenced in this case. This is a jurisdictional defect. Boyd, 717 So.2d at 526. Therefore, it may be raised for the first time on appeal. E.g., Polk County v. Sofka, 702 So.2d 1243 (Fla.1997); 84 Lumber Co. v. Cooper, 656 So.2d 1297 (Fla. 2d DCA 19...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Crain v. State
...when the affidavit of violation of probation itself is filed within the probationary period.") (citations omitted); Tatum v. State, 736 So.2d 1214, 1215 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) ("As the supreme court's answer to the question posed by this court in Boyd clearly establishes, when the affidavit al......
-
Morgan v. State
...jurisdiction, see Hoffman v. State, 729 So.2d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), Morgan could raise this defect at any time. See Tatum v. State, 736 So.2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); C.W. v. State, 637 So.2d 28 (Fla. 2d DCA The trial court had no jurisdiction to impose Morgan's new terms of community c......
-
State v. Williams, 1D17-1581
...State did not properly toll probation and that the court consequently did not have jurisdiction. The State relies on Tatum v. State , 736 So.2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), to support its position that this jurisdictional issue can be raised for the first time on appeal. The issue in Tatum , h......
-
Fisher v. State, 1D02-326.
...did not have jurisdiction to revoke defendant's probation absent evidence that probation was part of his sentence); Tatum v. State, 736 So.2d 1214, 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke probation after probationary period had Accordingly, we RE......
-
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).
...least, no district court has written an opinion addressing that issue. However, one might find direction in the case of Tatum v. State, 736 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), a First District opinion. Tatum clarified the holding of the Boyd court by stating, "As the Supreme Court's answer to ......