Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

458 So. 2d 799

458 So.2d 799

9 Fla.L.Weekly 2214

Starling v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 18, 1984

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1984-10-18

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1985

1 state decisions

Relies on Rodriguez v. New York · 110 So. 2d 7 - State v. Bateh · Phillips v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-10-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAUKSCH, Judge.

¶1This is an appeal from a sentence in a grand theft case. The Appellant does not seek any specific relief but we presume he would have a reversal of the sentence. He alleges in his brief that the sentence is cruel and unusual.

¶2Appellant was convicted of numerous counts of grand theft. He was placed on probation as to some counts and no sentence was imposed as to others.

¶3As we said in Phillips v. State, 455 So.2d 656 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) and as was said by the Supreme Court in Bateh v. Florida, 110 So.2d 7 (Fla.1959), cert. denied, Bateh v. Florida, 361 U.S. 826, 80 S.Ct. 74, 4 L.Ed.2d 69 (1959) it is error to suspend a sentence indefinitely. It is unfair to all concerned, victims and defendant alike, and serves no beneficial purpose.

¶4While the sentence is affirmed, as in Phillips, the practice should be discouraged.

¶5AFFIRMED.

COBB, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.
/458/so2d/799 · .json · Public domain