Gomez v. State
Eddie GOMEZ v. The STATE of Florida
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
There is no showing in the record that the court abused its discretion in denying defendant’s oral motion for continuance of the trial. Magill v. State, 386 So.2d 1188 (Fla.1980); Lyles v. State, 312 So.2d 495 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.190(g).
Appellant’s split sentence of four years of imprisonment followed by four years of probation is invalid, Villery v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission, 396 So.2d 1107 (Fla.1981), but upon remand for correcting the sentence, the court may, as one of its options, withdraw the sentence altogether and impose a new sentence not to exceed eight years imprisonment (with credit for time served). Flynn v. State, (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (case no. AE-15, opinion filed October 30, 1981); Alexander v. State, 402 So.2d 485 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Lewis v. State, 402 So.2d 482 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). In light of this construction placed on Villery, supra, which could result in the imposition of a lengthier prison sentence, the appellant may wish to decline correction of his sentence.
The conviction under review is affirmed; the sentence under review is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing unless the defendant withdraws his request for resentencing, in which event the sentence under review shall stand affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.