Case Name: Eddie TORRES, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-12-03
Citations: 627 So. 2d 120
Docket Number: No. 93-1445
Parties: Eddie TORRES, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: ZEHMER, C.J., and ERVIN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 627
Pages: 120–121

Head Matter:
Eddie TORRES, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 93-1445.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Dec. 3, 1993.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Carl S. McGinnes, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Charlie McCoy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Eddie Torres, Jr., appeals final judgments and probation revocation orders in several circuit court cases, raising two contentions. First, he contends that, in revoking probation and imposing sentence on count II in circuit court case no. 91-2037, the court erroneously failed to allow credit for prison time he served on count I prior to violating probation as required by Tripp v. State, 622 So.2d 941 (Fla.1993). We agree and remand for modification of that sentence to allow such credit in compliance with Tripp; however, Appellant is not entitled to credit for gain time forfeited by reason of his violation of probation. See § 944.28(1) and 948.06(6), Fla. Stat. (1991); Bradley v. State, 616 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
Second, Torres contends that his habitual felony offender sentence imposed in circuit court ease no. 92-1877 should be reversed because section 775.084, Florida Statutes, denies equal protection of law; is constitutionally inequitable, irrational, vague and subject to arbitrary and capricious application; provides no due process of law; and violates the principle of separation of power. These arguments have repeatedly been rejected and are meritless. E.g., Ross v. State, 601 So.2d 1190 (Fla.1992); London v. State, 623 So.2d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Barber v. State, 564 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 576 So.2d 284 (Fla.1990).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
ZEHMER, C.J., and ERVIN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.