Snyder v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT JUSTIN C. SNYDER, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2D09-5797 Opinion filed March 25, 2011. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Mark A. Steinbeck, Judge. James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Megan Olson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ronald Napolitano, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. ALTENBERND, Judge. Justin C. Snyder appeals three sentences entered after the trial court found him guilty of violating the terms of his probation. The State concedes that an error exists in two of the three sentences. We reverse those sentences but conclude that on remand the trial court can correct the error by striking the one-year term of probation in the two erroneous sentences. Mr. Snyder pleaded no contest to burglary of a dwelling and two counts of grand theft in 2008. The trial court sentenced him as a youthful offender to a term of ten months' incarceration followed by five years' probation for the burglary and two concurrent terms of ten months' incarceration followed by four years' probation for each count of grand theft. After he served the terms of incarceration, he violated probation. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court revoked his probation and sentenced him to three concurrent terms of sixty months' incarceration with credit for time served, followed by one year of probation. Although the trial court was clearly attempting to impose a proper youthful offender sentence on violation of probation, it was not authorized to impose a sentence that was longer than the statutory maximum for a charged offense. See ยง 958.14, Fla. Stat. (2008). In this case, the sentence imposed for the burglary is a legal sentence. The concurrent sentences for the two counts of grand theft exceed the five-year statutory maximum for a third-degree felony. The State concedes that these two sentences exceed the statutory maximum. Because the existing sentence for the burglary is a proper sentence and will require Mr. Snyder to serve a five-year term in prison, there is no need to remand this case to the trial court to consider a shorter term of imprisonment for the two counts of grand theft. On remand, the trial court shall strike the one-year period of probation as to these two offenses, leaving the concurrent five-year terms of imprisonment with credit for time served as the total sentence for these offenses. -2- Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. DAVIS and WALLACE, JJ., Concur. -3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
