Thurmond v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAppellant entered a negotiated plea of guilty to a charge of theft of property and received a sentence of a term of imprisonment and sixty months’ probation. Appellant later violated the terms of his probation, and the trial court revoked Appellant’s probation. Appellant subsequently filed a petition to correct an illegal sentence, alleging that his sentence on revocation was illegal. The trial court denied the petition. Appellant appealed, arguing that the adjudication of the State’s petition to revoke was barred by the prohibition against double jeopardy because he had already been incarcerated under an Act 570 Jail Letter signed by his probation officer. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Appellant failed to allege an adequate basis for multiple criminal punishments in violation of the prohibition against double jeopardy.
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.