MANUEL PARRADO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Defendant's thirty-year sentence for cocaine trafficking was vacated because the trial judge imposed a departure from guidelines without entering written reasons as required by Pope v. State, and the case was remanded for resentencing within guidelines.
A sentencing court must enter written reasons for any departure from the sentencing guidelines, and absent such written reasons, the sentence must be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing within the guidelines.
[1] A sentencing court's failure to enter written reasons for departure from the sentencing guidelines requires vacation of the sentence and remand for resentencing within th…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendant was convicted of cocaine trafficking and related offenses. The guidelines sentence range was twelve to seventeen years, with a minimum manda…
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 Departure From Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals his sentence of two consecutive fifteen year terms on cocaine trafficking and related convictions. The defendant’s guidelines sentence scored out to a minimum mandatory term of fifteen years or to a guidelines sentence of twelve to seventeen years. The trial judge sentenced defendant to a total of thirty years, stating at the bottom of the guidelines score sheet that written reasons for depar ture would be submitted by separate order. However, no written reasons were ever entered.
We vacate the sentence based on Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla.1990), which held that in the absence of a written departure order, the case is to be remanded for resentencing of the defendant within the guidelines. We recognize that the sentencing here occurred on May 2, 1988, which was before Pope was announced and before the related case of Ree v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla.1990), was handed down. This court has held that Pope applies retroactively, but has consistently certified the question. See Fonseca v. State, 570 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Perez v. State, 566 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). We again certify the question of whether Pope should be applied retroactively.
Accordingly, we remand for sentencing within the guidelines but stay the mandate pending the supreme court’s answer of the certified question.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 1990)
- REE v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla. 1990)
- Perez v. State, 566 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Fonseca v. State, 570 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)