Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

388 So. 2d 1354

Heatherington v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 15, 1980

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1980-10-15

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1986

2 state decisions

Relies on State v. Dent · Depson v. State · 328 So. 2d 465 - State v. Hubbard

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1980-10-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

COWART, Judge.

¶1We have examined the record and find competent substantial evidence to support appellant’s conviction of delivery of phenobarbital and of conspiracy. State v. Dent, 322 So.2d 543 (Fla.1975); State v. Hubbard, 328 So.2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).

¶2The trial court placed the appellant on probation with a condition that he serve fifty-one weeks in jail without gain time or furlough. Appellant cites Depson v. State, 363 So.2d 43 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), as holding that the exclusion of gain time was improper. Apparently Depsoninvolved a straight time term of years, whereas the confinement here was as a condition of probation. Adams v. State, 387 So.2d 498 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), holds that confinement as a condition of probation is not a sentence within the meaning of the statute, section 951.21(1), Florida Statutes (1979), providing statutory gain time for a county prisoner.

¶3The judgments and orders placing appellant on probation are

¶4AFFIRMED.

FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr. and SHARP, JJ., concur.
/388/so2d/1354 · .json · Public domain