RAMIREZ v. STATE (2018)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Charles RAMIREZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18–331

Decided: April 11, 2018

Before SALTER, EMAS and LINDSEY, JJ.

Charles Ramirez, in proper person. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. See § 958.14, Fla. Stat. (2010) (providing in part that “no youthful offender shall be committed to the custody of the department [of corrections] for a substantive violation for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he or she was found guilty, with credit for time served while incarcerated, or for a technical or nonsubstantive violation for a period longer than 6 years or for a period longer than the maximum sentence for the offense for which he or she was found guilty, whichever is less”); Flores v. State, 46 So.3d 102, 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (holding that the six-year prison sentence “cap” under section 958.14 applies only to sentences resulting from a technical violation of youthful offender supervision, not to a substantive violation (i.e., the commission of a new criminal act), and that this is true even if the new criminal charge is nolle prossed) (citing State v. Meeks, 789 So.2d 982 (Fla. 2001)).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network