ARSENIO JACKSON A/K/A ARLISS THOMAS, 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.
A trial court may sentence a defendant beyond the recommended guidelines range without written reasons if the sentence falls within the permitted range.
The appellant was sentenced to twelve years for armed robbery, exceeding the recommended guidelines range. The sentence was within the permitted range…
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 Violation Of Community Control cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Judge.
The appellant challenges his judgment and sentence for two counts of armed robbery. He argues that the trial court erred in departing from the presumptive guidelines sentence without providing valid reasons for departure in writing.
The appellant’s scoresheet reveals that the appellant scored 139 points, falling into the five and one-half to seven years’ recommended range. His sentence was bumped up to the next higher cell for violation of community control, which has a recommended range of seven to nine years and a permitted range of five and one-half to twelve years’ incarceration. The trial court sentenced the appellant to two concurrent terms of twelve years’ incarceration.
Under the revised Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.701 and 3.988, effective July 1, 1988, a trial court may sentence a defendant beyond the recommended range without providing written reasons for departure if the sentence falls within the permitted range. See Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure Re: Sentencing Guidelines, 522 So. 2d 374 (Fla.1988); § 921.0015, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1988).
As the appellee argues, the twelve-year sentence imposed by the trial court was within the permitted range of the guidelines and, therefore, is not a departure sentence requiring supporting written reasons.
Accordingly, we affirm the appellant’s judgment and sentence.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barfield v. State, 599 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…ed on his original sentence. With respect to the grand theft offenses, the ten-year sentence imposed by the trial court falls within the permitted range of the sentencing guidelines and, consequently, is not a departure sentence. Jackson v. State, 556 So. 2d 513, 514 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Accordingly, we affirm this portion of the sentence. REVERSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED. GLICKSTEIN, C.J., GUNTHER and POLEN, JJ., concur.…
-
DeRICCIULLI v. State, 592 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…d and permitted any nonstate prison sanction. The court correctly determined that the one-cell bump-up for an offense occurring after July 1, 1988, allowed it to impose a sentence within the permitted range of the next higher cell. Jackson v. State, 556 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). When it imposed the sentence, however, the trial court mistakenly believed that the permitted range of the next higher cell extended to 4V2 years when it actually extended to only 3V2 years. The trial court sentenced the defenda…
-
McRAE v. State, 592 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…PER CURIAM. Defendant’s sentences are affirmed. See Manuel v. State, 582 So. 2d 823 (Fla.2d DCA 1991); Jackson v. State, 556 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). We strike special condition number six contained in the written orders of probation because that condition was not announced at sentencing. See Williams v. State, 542 So. 2d 479 (Fla.2d DCA 1989). FRANK, A.C.J., and PATTERSON a…
Authorities Cited
- Cauthen v. State, 522 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 1988)