Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

79 So. 3d 879

Harris v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 10, 2012

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2012-02-10

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 2012

1 state decisions

Relies on 63 So. 3d 887 - Burns v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2012-02-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

GRIFFIN, J.

¶1 Appellant, Luis Harris [“Harris”], appeals his judgment and sentence after a violation of probation.

¶2 On April 28, 2011, the trial court held a hearing on Harris’s violation of probation. Prior to the hearing, the trial court offered Harris appointed counsel. Harris refused counsel and decided to represent himself. After a contentious hearing, the trial court found that Harris violated probation and immediately sentenced him. However, prior to sentencing Harris, the trial court did not renew the offer of counsel.

¶3 On appeal, Harris correctly asserts that he is entitled to a new sentencing because the offer of counsel was not renewed. Hays v. State, 63 So.3d 887 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). The State properly concedes error. Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for a resentencing consistent with this opinion.

¶4 SENTENCE VACATED and REMANDED.

TORPY and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
/79/so3d/879 · .json · Public domain