HENRY LEE WILSON, 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.
Henry Lee Wilson appeals his probation violation sentence, which combined county jail time with community control. The court reversed and remanded because the trial court failed to provide written reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines, as required by State v. Davis.
A sentencing disposition combining county jail incarceration and community control constitutes a departure sentence requiring written reasons for departure, regardless of whether the combined periods exceed the guideline maximums.
[1] A sentencing disposition that combines county jail incarceration with community control constitutes a departure sentence requiring written reasons, even if the total peri…
[2] A departure sentence requires written reasons for the departure.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a sentencing disposition which includes combined sanctions of county jail incarcération and community control constitutes a departure sentence that requires written reasons for departure, even though the combined periods of incarceration and community control do not exceed the maximum period of incarceration permitted by the guidelines”
Establishes the legal principle requiring written departure reasons for combined jail and community control sentences
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilson violated probation and was sentenced on September 3, 1992. The sentencing guidelines scoresheet showed 154 points, recommending non-state priso…
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 One-Cell Increase cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Henry Lee Wilson appeals the sentence imposed on September 3, 1992, for violating the terms of his probation. The sentencing guidelines scoresheet reflected a total of 154 points with a recommended range of any non-state prison sanction. Applying the one-cell increase allowed for the probation violation, the guidelines permitted a sentence of community control or up to 30 months’ incarceration. The trial court sentenced Wilson to serve 2 years on community control, with the added condition that 1 year be served in county jail, followed by 6 months’ probation.
The public defender filed a brief (on February 1, 1993) pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), certifying that no good faith argument could be made in support of reversal. We have reviewed the record and find no basis for reversal with a single exception. In January of this year, the supreme court held in State v. Davis, 630 So. 2d 1059 (Fla.1994), that a sentencing disposition which includes combined sanctions of county jail incarcération and community control constitutes a departure sentence that requires written reasons for departure, even though the combined periods of incarceration and community control do not exceed the maximum period of incarceration permitted by the guidelines. The sentencing cell involved in Davis provided, similar to this case, a range of community control or 12 to 30 months’ incarceration. Of course, neither counsel nor the trial court had the benefit of the Davis decision when this matter was handled a year ago.
Accordingly, the appealed sentence is REVERSED and this cause is REMANDED for resentencing in accordance with the Davis decision.
ZEHMER, C.J., and JOANOS and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- State v. Davis, 630 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1994)