Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Permenter v. State
Citations: 635 So. 2d 1016; 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3692; 1994 WL 141211Docket: No. 92-4103
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; April 22, 1994; Florida; State Appellate Court
Timothy Permenter appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(a). Permenter had previously pled guilty to multiple offenses, including attempted murder and armed burglary, resulting in a 20-year sentence that included two consecutive 3-year minimum mandatory terms for firearm use, followed by 15 years of probation. His appeal from this sentence was dismissed as untimely in June 1992. In his motion, filed in August 1992, Permenter argued that the minimum mandatory terms should run concurrently because all offenses arose from a single criminal episode, referencing Palmer v. State. However, the trial court denied the motion, stating that Permenter committed separate offenses against distinct victims, which justified the imposition of consecutive minimum mandatory terms, consistent with Gardner v. State. The court emphasized that consecutive sentences are appropriate when offenses are distinct in time and place. Permenter's motion failed to demonstrate that his crimes were not separate and distinct, thus affirming the trial court's decision. The ruling was supported by precedents indicating that consecutive minimum mandatory sentences are permissible under the circumstances described. Judges Ervin and Webster concurred with the decision.