Kirkman v. WainwrightKirkman v. Wainwright
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Margene A. Roper, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for respondent.
SHARP, Judge.
Kirkman petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus on the grounds that he is entitled to immediate release from the Department of Corrections. We agree and issue the writ.
Petitioner was sentenced to thirty years for a robbery conviction in 1975, ten years of which were to be served in prison and twenty years on probation. He served approximately four years, and then was released on parole.
In 1984, he was found guilty of violating his probation,1 and he was sentenced to a four and one-half year prison term. This was within the Sentencing Guidelines,
Kirkman filed an appeal from the trial court‘s denial of his motion filed pursuant to
The state argues that the trial court intended to sentence Kirkman to a term of years which would be sufficiently long to result in a four and one-half year term, after giving him credit for the prior time served in prison. This would have required the trial court to enter a “departure” sentence under the Guidelines, which it clearly could have done.
However, although the trial court may have intended this result, it did not sentence Kirkman in the manner to achieve that goal. Meintzer v. State, 399 So.2d 133 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Having sentenced him to four and one-half years, neither the trial court, nor we, can change that sentence. Harrison v. Wainwright, 408 So.2d 800 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 419 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 1982).
It is clear that pursuant to
Since that credit for prison time in this case results in Kirkman having served at least three months longer than the four and one-half year Guideline sentence imposed,
WRIT GRANTED; PETITIONER RELEASED FROM CUSTODY.
COBB, C.J., and FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., J., concur.