Stroble v. State, 689 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). · Go Syfert
Search
Stroble v. State, 689 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
16 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Gonzales v. State (fladistctapp, 2002-05-03)
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gonzales v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · confidence medium
Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Huff v. State, 672 So.2d 634, 635 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)(original sentence improper but not reversible because defendant already received the benefits of the improper sentence).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Vause v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Even if the suspended prison term of the original sentence was in excess of the term provided for under the 1994 guidelines, "[one] who takes advantage of an invalid sentence until he violates community control is estopped to assert the invalidity of his original sentence." See Dupree v. State, 708 So.2d 968, 971 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), quoting Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 697 So.2d 512 (Fla.1997).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Dupree v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · confidence medium
Nevertheless, Dupree did not challenge the trial court's reimposition of two years' community control until after he violated the terms of that community control and the trial court sentenced him to a term of imprisonment. "[O]ne who takes advantage of an invalid sentence until he violates community control is estopped to assert the invalidity of his original sentence." Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 697 So.2d 512 (Fla.1997); see Huff v. State, 672 So.2d 634, 635 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) ("[A]lthough his original suspended sentence may have been improper ..., …
cited Cited "see" State v. Sehnert
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 697 So.2d 512 (Fla. 1997).
cited Cited "see" Cooper v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 697 So.2d 512 (Fla.1997); Eneias v. State, 696 So.2d 1365 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Fla. R.Crim.
cited Cited "see" Johnson v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 697 So.2d 512 (Fla.1997).
cited Cited "see" Harris v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Grant v. State, 611 So.2d 110 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).
discussed Cited "see" Eneias v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Henry v. State, 679 So.2d 885 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 686 So.2d 578 (Fla.1996).The ineffective assistance of counsel claim could or should have been raised in the first rule 3.850 proceeding.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Toomajan v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 697 So.2d 512 (Fla.1997) (defendant who accepted benefits of community control which was unauthorized is estopped from asserting invalidity after violating conditions).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Tisdol v. State
Fla. · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (holding that “one who takes advantage of an invalid sentence until he violates community control is es-topped to assert the invalidity of his original sentence”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Leonard STROBLE, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
96-3427.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Mar 7, 1997.
689 So. 2d 1089
Per Curiam.
Cited by 15 opinions  |  Published

Leonard Stroble, Mayo, pro se.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

HARRIS, Judge.

Leonard Stroble has asked for a rehearing on our previous Per Curiam Affirmance. He suggests that we ignored the fact that his original sentence was one not authorized by Poore v. State, 531 So.2d 161 (Fla.1988). We did not ignore this fact; we merely conclude that it makes no difference.

In 1990, Stroble was sentenced as an habitual offender but this sentence was suspended provided he successfully serve a term on community control. This sentence was not appealed. He was alleged to have violated his community control twice in 1991. The first violation was dismissed; on the second, he was sentenced to ten years imprisonment. We affirmed this sentence in Stroble v. State, 602 So.2d 541 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).

In this Rule 3.800(a) motion, Stroble again attacks the legality of his original sentence. He made a similar attack in a previous Rule 3.800(a) motion which was denied by the trial court and not appealed. An issue previously reviewed on the merits and rejected is barred from reconsideration by the doctrine of the law of the case. Raley v. State, 675 So.2d 170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).

[*1090] Another reason for affirming the trial court is that although the original sentence was not authorized by Poore, Stroble accepted the benefits of the sentence without objection and complained only after violating the terms of his "illegal" community control. We held in Warrington v. State, 660 So.2d 385 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), that one who takes advantage of an invalid sentence until he violates community control is estopped to assert the invalidity of his original sentence.

With this explanation, Stroble's Motion for Rehearing is denied.

PETERSON, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur.