CARLOS ZAMORA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Concurrent Sentences cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, Carlos Zamora, was convicted of two counts of trafficking in cocaine, two counts of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, and one count of delivery of cocaine. We find no merit in the appellant’s challenges to the convictions, and we, accordingly, affirm them. However, we reverse the sentences imposed by the trial court.
The trial court imposed consecutive minimum mandatory sentences resulting in a total sentence which exceeded the permitted guidelines maximum of twelve years. This was error. Where statutory minimums preclude sentencing within the permitted guidelines, as in this case, the trial court must impose either concurrent or consecutive minimum mandatory sentences to come as close to the permitted guidelines as possible. Branam v. State, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla.1990).
We, therefore, remand for resentencing.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
SCHOONOVER, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barry v. State, 654 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…atory sentences preclude sentencing within the permitted guidelines, the trial court, in order to come as close to the permitted guidelines range as possible, must impose either concurrent or consecutive minimum mandatory sentences. Zamora v. State, 584 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). See also Branam v. State, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla.1990). In the appellant’s first appeal, we reversed and remanded for resentencing within the guidelines. In order to resentence the appellant within the permitted range of the guidel…
-
Fannin v. State, 751 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…delines. See, e.g., Timonere v. State, 666 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (co-defendant of Fannin); Barry v. State, 654 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (co-defendant of Fannin); Wilner v. Singletary, 647 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Zamora v. State, 584 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Hemandez-Reinoso v. State, 583 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Boom v. State, 574 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). The Fourth District, in Darrisaw v. State, 682 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), agreed with our interpretation of Bra…
-
Lucien Wilner v. State, 629 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…direct appeal, the defendant’s appellate counsel did challenge the sentence, but did not argue that it was error to make the minimum mandatory sentences consecutive when the scoresheet would authorize only concurrent sentences. See Zamora v. State, 584 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). This court affirmed on direct appeal. On the request for postconvietion relief, the trial court correctly ruled that on the face of the record the sentence was not illegal and that any incorrect application of the rules concern…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Branam v. State, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 1990)