From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Austin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 20, 1981
400 So. 2d 495 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

Opinion

No. 80-988.

May 20, 1981.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Orange County, Frank N. Kaney, J.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Ronald K. Zimmet, Chief, App. Division, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and C. Michael Barnette, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.


Although appellant, a juvenile was tried in the criminal division of the circuit court upon a direct information pursuant to section 39.04(2)(e)4., Florida Statutes (1979), and was not "transferred" from the juvenile division pursuant to section 39.02(5)(a), Florida Statutes (1979), he was entitled to the sentencing benefits and procedure of section 39.111(6), Florida Statutes (1979), and section 958.05(2), Florida Statutes (1979). State v. Cain, 381 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 1980); Goodson v. State, 392 So.2d 1335 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Accordingly, this cause is remanded for resentencing in accordance with the cited authorities and appellant's prior sentence is

REVERSED.

DAUKSCH, C.J., and ORFINGER, J., concur.


Summaries of

Austin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 20, 1981
400 So. 2d 495 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)
Case details for

Austin v. State

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL RICHARD AUSTIN, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: May 20, 1981

Citations

400 So. 2d 495 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

Citing Cases

Toussaint v. State

Section 39.111(7), Florida Statutes (1989) applies to juveniles who are tried upon a direct information as…

Pendarvis v. State

Of course, appellant did not object below. We would be hard put to try to explain to the trial judge where he…