Legal Opinion

Heath v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 14, 1990No. 89-1646PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ERVIN, Judge.

Appellant’s motion to correct sentence, which was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), is meritorious for two reasons. First, the trial court erred by retaining jurisdiction over one-half, rather than one-third, of the sentences imposed upon appellant. The retention statute in effect at the time appellant was convicted and sentenced should have been applied, rather than the statute in effect at the time the offense was committed.1 See Nazworth v. State, 473 So.2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Second, it was error for the trial court to retain jurisdiction…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Nazworth v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  2. Brown v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Mobley v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  2. AYALA-LAIES v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2009
  3. Sapp v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API