Smith v. State

The sole point meriting discussion is the appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in its sentence. The appellant was sentenced to nine years in prison to run consecutively with the sentence that the defendant is presently on parole for and any other pending case. The trial court erred in requiring the sentence to be served consecutively to a sentence which has not yet been imposed on other pending charges. It is improper to commence a sentence after the imposition of a sentence for any future unrelated crime. Wallace v. State, 41 Fla. 547, 26 So. 713 (1899); Percival v. State, 506…