Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2001

Archambault v. State

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided June 29, 2001 · Orfinger, Sharp, Thompson

789 So. 2d 463; 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8997; 2001 WL 725700 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

McMahill v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

SHARP, W., J,

We affirm Archambault’s sentences which were imposed following revocation of his probation. The commission of new criminal offenses by Archambault while on probation is sufficient to revoke that probation. See Norton v. State, 691 So.2d 616 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 698 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 1997); Singleton v. State, 633 So.2d 529 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Scherer v. State, 366 So.2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). In addition, Archambault is not entitled to credit for time spent in jail on unrelated charges. See Sheehan v. State, 759 So.2d 747 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Hopping v. State, 650 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, C.J., and ORFINGER, R.B., J., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.