Copeland v. State, 553 So. 2d 384

Copeland v. State

553 So. 2d 384

Fla. Dist. Ct. App.

1989

Check Treatment

ERVIN, Judge.

The probationary split sentence imposed on appellant is not illegal. See Poore v. State, 531 So.2d 161 (Fla.1988); Carter v. State, 552 So.2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). However, the trial court did err by sentencing appellant in excess of the one-cell bump-up for probation violation. See Lambert v. State, 545 So.2d 838 (Fla.1989); Franklin v. State, 545 So.2d 851 (Fla.1989). Additionally, the trial court erred by failing to give appellant credit for all earned gain-time. See Green v. State, 547 So.2d 925 (Fla.1989); Melvin v. State, 553 So.2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

AFFIRMED in part, and REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for the purpose of *385resentencing appellant either within the guidelines range or within the one-cell bump-up, with appropriate credit to be allowed for all previously earned gain-time.

SHIVERS, C.J. and NIMMONS, J., concur.