Jimmy Smith v. State
143 So. 3d 1023
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Jimmy Smith received withheld adjudications and concurrent youthful offender probation for multiple burglary and grand theft charges (2008).
- Smith violated probation twice; on the second violation he committed new crimes, pled guilty to the new charges, admitted probation violation, and the court revoked probation.
- The trial court adjudicated guilt on the original charges, revoked youthful offender status, and imposed concurrent state prison sentences (15 years for each burglary; 5 years for each grand theft), plus prison for the new offenses.
- Smith filed a Rule 3.800(b)(2) motion seeking reinstatement of youthful offender status for the original charges and correction of credit for time served; the trial court corrected credit but denied reinstatement of youthful offender status.
- The Fourth District reversed, holding the court erred by revoking youthful offender status after resentencing and remanded to reinstate that designation.
Issues
| Issue | Smith's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a trial court may revoke a youthful offender designation after probation is revoked for a substantive violation and impose an ordinary sentence | Once designated a youthful offender, that status must continue on resentencing even if probation is revoked | Rogers allows revocation of youthful offender status when defendant is convicted of new substantive offenses | Reversed: youthful offender status must be continued on resentencing; court erred by revoking it |
Key Cases Cited
- Yegge v. State, 88 So. 3d 1058 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (trial court must maintain youthful offender status upon resentencing)
- St. Cyr v. State, 106 So. 3d 487 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (once a youthful offender sentence is imposed, the status must continue on resentencing after probation violation)
- Smith v. State, 109 So. 3d 1180 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (court may impose up to statutory maximum for underlying offenses after substantive probation violation)
- Blacker v. State, 49 So. 3d 785 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (youthful offender status continuation rule)
- Rogers v. State, 972 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (relied on by State but limited by later precedent)
- Meeks v. State, 789 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 2001) (definition of substantive violation)
- Lee v. State, 67 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (discussion of sentencing limits for youthful offenders)