BENNY LEE WEBSTER, 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 sentence departing from the guidelines can be upheld on appeal if supported by any valid clear and convincing reasons, even if other improper reasons are included.
The trial court departed from sentencing guidelines when sentencing the appellant for robbery, burglary, and grand theft. Some reasons for departure w…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.701(D)(11) cases and more on FLexlaw
OTT, Judge.
The trial court departed from the sentencing guidelines when it sentenced appellant for robbery, burglary, and grand theft. Certain of the reasons relied upon by the trial court for departing are impermissible, i.e., other offenses for which no charges had been brought and no convictions secured. Nevertheless, we affirm.
The court gave a number of perfectly valid clear and convincing reasons for departing from the presumptive guidelines sentence. For example, he noted that the victims had suffered psychological harm, commenting their lives had been destroyed. See Green v. State, 455 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). He further noted it was a negotiated plea which included the dropping of certain charges and was negotiated before the sentencing guidelines became effective with the understanding that defendant could receive up to life in prison. See Green v. State, No. 84-14 (Fla. 2d DCA Sept. 19, 1984). Also, the court felt that the robbery was an outrageous, antisocial act against defenseless people. The victims were tied up and held prisoner. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(ll) does not prohibit a court from considering aggravating circumstances and actions of the accused in the commission of the offense. See Smith v. State, 454 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
We hold that a sentence departing from the guidelines can be upheld on appeal where supported by any valid clear and convincing reasons even though other improper reasons may be included. It is unnecessary to remand for resentencing, and the judgment and sentence are therefore affirmed. Accord Albritton v. State, 458 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Compare Young v. State, 455 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
Failure of the trial court to include written reasons in the judgment and sentence is not error where, as here, the reasons for the departure are clearly articulated in the record. Smith v. State, 454 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
AFFIRMED.
HOBSON, A.C.J., and SCHEB, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Johnson v. State, 462 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…1] State, 454 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), at footnote 2 it was indicated that such written statement is essential and an oral pronouncement will not suffice. Accord, Millett v. State, 460 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); contra, Webster v. State, 461 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Burke v. State, 456 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Harvey v. State, 456 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). The court’s departure from the presumptive guideline sentence thus may not be predicated upon its oral pronouncement; on re…
-
Oden v. State, 463 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…1984), on the issue of the need for written reasons for departing from the guidelines, we certify conflict, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(vi), with Bell v. State, 459 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Webster v. State, 461 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Brady v. State, 457 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Fleming v. State, 456 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Burke v. State, 456 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Klapp v. State, 456 So. 2d 970, 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Smith v. State,…
-
Marshall v. State, 468 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…ical trauma inflicted upon the victim is a valid reason for departure. Green v. State, 455 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). This one clear and convincing reason is sufficient to uphold the trial court’s departure from the guidelines. Webster v. State, 461 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Because the trial court erroneously applied the habitual offender statute, we reverse and remand for sentencing in accordance with the guidelines. The trial court at that time however may chose to depart from the guidelines if…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 454 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Young v. State, 455 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Green v. State, 455 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Albritton v. State, 458 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)