From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sanchez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 1, 1988
524 So. 2d 704 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 87-2197.

April 20, 1988. Rehearing Denied June 1, 1988.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Broward County; Thomas M. Coker, Jr., Judge.

J. David Bogenschutz of Kay and Bogenschutz, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and John W. Tiedemann, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

We grant appellant's motion for rehearing. The opinion of March 2, 1988 is withdrawn. We substitute the following opinion:


The defendant was adjudicated guilty of trafficking in cannabis and placed on three years probation. After serving two-thirds of that sentence, he filed motions to mitigate the term of probation and to vacate the adjudication. The trial court granted early termination of the term, but denied the motion to vacate the adjudication of guilt.

Affirmed. See State v. Beardsley, 464 So.2d 188 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). We certify conflict with Thompson v. State, 485 So.2d 42 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), as to whether an adjudication of guilt, imposed in conjunction with a probation sentence, may be vacated after 60 days incident to the authority of the sentencing court regarding the probation supervision.

GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., and TOBIN, DAVID L., Associate Judge, concur.


Summaries of

Sanchez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 1, 1988
524 So. 2d 704 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

Sanchez v. State

Case Details

Full title:CARLOS SANCHEZ, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jun 1, 1988

Citations

524 So. 2d 704 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

Citing Cases

Sanchez v. State

McDONALD, Justice. We review Sanchez v. State, 524 So.2d 704 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), because of conflict with…

Charatz v. State

This appeal followed. The state's answer brief maintains that an adjudication of guilt once imposed cannot be…