DANNY FOSTER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that consecutive sentences departing from sentencing guidelines require a written reason for departure.
Appellant pled guilty to two counts of issuing worthless checks and was sentenced to consecutive thirty-month terms after violating probation, exceedi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sentencing Guidelines Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
NIMMONS, Judge.
This is an appeal from the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentences which departed from the sentencing guidelines. We reverse and remand for resentencing.
Appellant pled guilty to two counts of issuing worthless checks and received one year of probation. Thereafter, appellant violated his probation and was sentenced to thirty months incarceration on each count to run consecutively for a total of sixty months. The recommended guidelines sentence was twelve to thirty months.
It is well-established that while a separate sentence must be imposed for each offense, the total sentence cannot exceed the total guidelines sentence unless a written reason for departure is given. White v. State, 489 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Carter v. State, 483 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(12). In the present case, no written reason for departure was given by the trial judge.
Accordingly, the sentences are vacated and the cause is remanded for resentencing in accordance with the sentencing guidelines unless a clear and convincing reason for departure is stated in writing. Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.701(d)(ll).
MILLS and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sheena Latson v. State, 193 So. 3d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…allenging the adequacy of counsel could be raised on direct appeal, as long as the error was “apparent on the face of the record.” See e.g., Whitaker v. State, 433 So. 2d 1352, 1353 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Gordon, 469 So. 2d at 795; Antunovich v. State, 491 So. 2d 328, 329 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). I submit these cases misread Stewart. Again, the defendant in Stewart did not seek relief because counsel performed ineffectively; rather, he sought-relief because the trial eourt denied a continuance, which he claimed depr…
-
Young v. State, 503 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…court’s deviating from the guidelines without giving a clear and convincing reason for doing so. As to the first point, we agree with the appellant that the trial court erred in utilizing twelve score-sheets. This Court held in Antunovich v. State, 491 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986): Rule 3.701(d)(1), Fla.R.Crim.P., provides that only one scoresheet shall be prepared for each defendant covering all offenses pending before the trial court for sentencing. Rule 3.701(d)(3) indicates which single scoresheet is…
-
Alphonso Brown v. State, 604 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…ctive assistance of counsel is collateral matter that may not be raised for the first time on appeal, unless facts on which claim is based are evident in appellate record); Blanco v. Wainwright, 507 So. 2d 1377, 1384 (Fla.1987); Antunovich v. State, 491 So. 2d 328, 329 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Appellant was sentenced as a habitual felony offender pursuant to section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1989), on Counts II through IV. He challenges the constitutionality of his habitualization, citing Johnson v. State, 589…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Carter v. State, 483 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- White v. State, 489 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)