Austile v. State
Austile v. State
Opinion of the Court
Austile was properly adjudicated guilty of the offenses of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny and grand larceny. See Platt v. State, Fla.App.2d, 1974, 291 So.2d 96. He received a single sentence of three years imprisonment. Since both these offenses arose out of the same transaction, the sentence
A period of probation was also properly imposed as to a separate offense which arose out of a different transaction, although the period of probation begins to run upon completion of the sentence imposed for the offense of breaking and entering. Sturn v. State, Fla.App.2d, 1974, 295 So.2d 713; Harris v. State, Fla.App. 4th, 1973, 278 So.2d 306.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.