Cluster 1781472

See Francois v. State, 695 So.2d 695, 697 (Fla.1997) (“[W]hen a probationary period expires, the court is divested of jurisdiction over the probationer unless, prior to that time, the appropriate steps were taken to revoke or modify the probation.”); Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89-90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (“[Wjhere it can be determined without an evidentiary hearing that a sentence has been imposed by a court without jurisdiction, that sentence is illegal, whatever its le…

Because Appellant’s probation on count seven ended prior to her arrest for violation of probation or the filing of an affidavit for violation of her probation and the issuance of a warrant thereon, the trial court was without jurisdiction to revoke Appellant’s probation on count seven.5 See State v. Hall, 641 So. 2d 403, 404 (Fla. 1994); Slingbaum v. State, 751 So. 2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

Section 948.04(2), states: “Upon the termination of the period of probation, the pro *21 bationer shall be released from probation and is not liable to sentence for the offense for which probation was allowed.” The jurisdictional limitations within these statutes provide that upon the expiration of a term of probation, a trial court is “divested of all jurisdiction over the person of the probationer unless in the meantime the processes of the court have been set in motion , …

See Sepulveda v. State, 909 So.2d 568, 571 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (“Sepulveda’s allegations that he was convicted and sentenced based on a violation of probation when the term of his probation had expired state a facially sufficient claim of an illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a).”); Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89-90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (holding that “where it can be determined without an evidentiary hearing that a sentence has been imposed by a court without jurisdiction,…

See Sofka, 702 So.2d at 1245 (holding that "the limits of a court's jurisdiction are of `primary concern,' requiring the court to address the issue `sua sponte when any doubt exists.' Mapoles v. Wilson, 122 So.2d 249, 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960)"); Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89-90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (holding "that where it can be determined without an evidentiary hearing that a sentence has been imposed by a court without jurisdiction, that sentence is illegal, whatever i…

Once a probation term has expired, the court is "divested of all jurisdiction over the person of the probationer unless in the meantime the processes of the court have been set in motion for revocation." Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (quoting State v. Hall, 641 So.2d 403, 404 (Fla.1994)).

See Slingbaum v. State, 751 So. 2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Jett v. State, 722 So. 2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Wilson v. State, 698 So. 2d 1380, 1381-82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

See Hernandez, 889 So.2d at 915 (stating that “[o]nce a probation term has expired, the court is ‘divested of all jurisdiction over the person of the probationer unless in the meantime the processes of the court have been set in motion for revocation’ ”) (quoting Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), quoting State v. Hall, 641 So.2d 403, 404 (Fla.1994)).

See Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (holding that a trial court i§ without jurisdiction to revoke probation once the probation has ended).

See Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

See Francois v. State, 695 So.2d 695 (Fla.1997), Slingbaum v. State, 751 So.2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

See Slingbaum, 751 So.2d at 90, n. 1 .