SC02-2362 - Thomas B. Gibson v. Florida Department Of Corrections

State: Florida

Docket No: SC02-2362

Case Date: 10/21/2004

Preview:Supreme Court of Florida
____________ No. SC02-2362 ____________ THOMAS B. GIBSON, Petitioner, vs. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent. ON REHEARING [October 21, 2004] PARIENTE, C.J. This case concerns the statutory authority of the Department of Corrections (DOC) to forfeit gain time from an expired sentence and apply the forfeiture to a sentence being served on a different offense. We review Gibson v. Florida Department of Corrections, 828 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), in which the First District Court of Appeal certified the following question of great public importance: Does the forfeiture penalty enunciated in Eldridge v. Moore, 760 So.2d 888 (Fla.2000), apply where a defendant receives a sentence of incarceration for one offense followed by a sentence of probation for another offense, where both crimes were scored on a single scoresheet and the trial court awards prison credit pursuant to Tripp v. State, 622

So.2d 941 (Fla.1993), upon violation of probation for the second offense? Id. at 424.1 I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In three different cases arising from crimes committed on different dates in 1993, Gibson was convicted of committing numerous counts of forgery and uttering a forged instrument or forged bills, all third-degree felonies. All the offenses were included in a single guidelines scoresheet because the cases were pending for sentencing at the same time. 2 The trial court sentenced Gibson to consecutive terms of five years in prison in Case Nos. 93-216 and 93-297 for a total of ten years' incarceration, followed by consecutive terms of five years on probation on the counts of uttering a forged instrument and five years on probation on the counts of forgery in Case No. 93-360 for a total of ten years' probation. Thus, the sanctions in Case Nos. 93-216 and 93-297 contained no probationary 1. The First District's certification of a question of great public importance gives us discretionary jurisdiction to review its decision. See art. V,

Download SC02-2362 - Thomas B. Gibson v. Florida Department Of Corrections.pdf