489 So. 2d 888 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1986
Bales appeals a judgment and sentence entered after revocation of his probation. He contends that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the order which placed him on probation, and therefore also lacked jurisdiction to revoke the probation and impose a prison sentence. We agree and reverse.
Bales entered a plea of guilty to charges of disorderly intoxication and battery on a law enforcement officer. In exchange for that plea the trial judge agreed to a plea bargain which provided that Bales would receive a sentence of two years on the felony battery charge and of time served on the misdemeanor intoxication charge. The bargained-for sentence was imposed on August 9, 1983. On September 9, 1983 Bales filed a pro se motion for mitigation of sentence in which he represented that he was actively pursuing counseling and treatment for his alcoholism. By order filed on October 10, 1983, this motion was denied by the trial judge with leave to refile the motion within 60 days. On November 16, 1983 a different judge denied appellant’s
Because the court lost jurisdiction to mitigate Bales’ sentence 60 days after it was initially imposed, the probation order dated January 3, 1984 was void. Since the order placing Bales on probation was void, the order revoking his probation and the sentence imposed are also void. Wilson v. State, 487 So.2d 1130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Accordingly, the order purporting to place Bales on probation, the order revoking that probation, and the judgment and sentence entered upon the revocation of probation are reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to reinstate Bales’ original judgment and sentence with credit for all time hé has served.