Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

717 So. 2d 165

Schimpf v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 16, 1998

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1998-09-16

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 2000

1 state decisions

Relies on Davis v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1998-09-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Appellant claimed in his motion to correct sentence that his total split sentence of four years of imprisonment followed by four years of probation for the third degree felony of grand theft exceeded the five year statutory maximum and was therefore illegal. See Davis v. State, 661 So.2d 1193, 1196 (Fla. 1995). While the state agreed, the trial court mistakenly entered an order correcting a different sentence, which was ordered to run concurrently with the illegal sentence.

¶2We remand the case for the trial court to resentence appellant in connection with Count I of case number 94-1044. The new sentence for that count shall not exceed five years.

WARNER, POLEN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
/717/so2d/165 · .json · Public domain