From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pruitt v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Dec 24, 1980
403 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

Opinion

No. 79-1536.

December 24, 1980.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Pinellas County, William L. Walker, J.

B. Robert Ohle, St. Petersburg, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee and Michael J. Kotler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.


James B. Pruitt appeals his conviction for attempted possession of more than 100 pounds of marijuana. We find no merit in the points raised on appeal and affirm the conviction. However, we remand for resentencing.

Appellant was convicted of attempted possession of more than 100 pounds of marijuana. This court has recently held possession of more than 100 pounds of marijuana to be a third-degree felony. Carvajal v. State, 392 So.2d 287 (Fla.2d DCA 1980); Reinersman v. State, 382 So.2d 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). Section 777.04(4)(d), Florida Statutes (1979), then requires that attempted possession be a first-degree misdemeanor. The maximum punishment for a first-degree misdemeanor is one year in prison and a $1,000.00 fine. Sections 775.082(4)(a), 775.083(1)(d), Florida Statutes (1979). The court sentenced appellant to five years in prison and a $5,000.00 fine.

We vacate the illegal sentence imposed and remand for resentencing within the limits set out above.

BOARDMAN, Acting C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.


Summaries of

Pruitt v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Dec 24, 1980
403 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)
Case details for

Pruitt v. State

Case Details

Full title:JAMES B. PRUITT, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Dec 24, 1980

Citations

403 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

Citing Cases

Zimmerman v. State

The failure to impose that fine renders the sentence illegal. Cf. Kelly v. State, 359 So.2d 493 (Fla. 1st DCA…

Wickett v. State

The sentence was therefore illegal because it was in excess of what the law permits. Pruitt v. State, 403…