Opinion · Supreme Court of Florida
McKnight v. State
McKnight v. State, 616 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1993)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of Florida
- Jurisdiction
- Florida
- Date
- 1993-03-25
- Topic
- litigation
How later courts describe this case
- finding split sentence of incarceration under the sentencing guidelines followed by probation as habitual offender to be "illegal hybrid sentence"
- disapproving State v. Kendrick, 596 So.2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA), review dismissed, 613 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1992)
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed McKnight v. State. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 25 opinions
Gregory McKNIGHT, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 79689.
Supreme Court of Florida.
March 25, 1993.James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and John S. Lynch, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Davis G. Anderson and Peggy Quince, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tampa, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
We review McKnight v. State, 595 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), because of its conflict with State v. Kendrick, 596 So.2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), review dismissed, 613 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1992). We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution.
We hold that the trial judge has the discretion to place an habitual felony offender on probation. As the basis for our conclusion, we adopt the rationale of the en banc opinion in King v. State, 597 So.2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 602 So.2d 942 (Fla. 1992). We do not address the other points raised by petitioner.
We disapprove Kendrick to the extent that it conflicts with our opinion, and we approve the decision below.
It is so ordered.
BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, SHAW, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.