Legal Opinion

Mulligan v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 11, 2007No. 5D06-1651PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtMonaco, J.

We affirm the trial court’s finding that the appellant, Timothy James Mulligan, violated the terms of his probation, as well as the sentence for that violation. Mr. Mulligan also asserts that he was not given credit for the time he actually served in prison for the incarcerative portion of his split sentence. See Sainvilus v. State, 689 So.2d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). We affirm in this respect, as well, because the error, if any, is unpreserved.

A sentencing error is not appropriately raised on appeal unless it has first been brought to the attention of the trial court either at the time of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Durr v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000
  2. State v. HamnerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002
  3. Sainvilus v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
  4. Hayden v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Smith v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API