GIBSON HAULING, INC., DAVID B. GIBSON, BARBARA GIBSON, AND MICHAEL E. JORDAN, PETITIONERS,

v.

DONNA M. ARMBRISTER, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF PAUL ALBERT ARMBRISTER, DECEASED, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• Blackwelder v. State, 476 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
  …1984). Because it is apparent that the court intended to impose the maximum penalties provided by law for the six crimes and they were not offenses over which the court could retain jurisdiction, there is no need for resentencing. Tillman v. State, 466 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). However, the record must be corrected to reflect that appellant was not sentenced under the guidelines for these crimes. Appellant also argues that because the statutory maximum for a first degree felony is thirty years, the tr…
• Kaymore v. State, 482 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
  …ase, however, the record reveals that the trial court obviously would have imposed the maximum statutory penalty in any event, and no purpose would be served by resentencing. See Davis v. State, 478 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Tillman v. State, 466 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Accordingly, we affirm the sentence but remand with directions to correct the record to reflect that appellant was not sentenced under the guidelines. AFFIRMED and REMANDED for correction of the record. COBB, C.J., and ORFING…
• Davis v. State, 478 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
  …before October 1, 1983, was treated under the guidelines even though the record contains no evidence of an affirmative selection to be treated under [*1155] the guidelines in that ease. Appellant is correct, but in this case as in Tillman v. State, 466 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), it appears “[n]o purpose would be served to order resentencing since the court obviously intended to impose the maximum penalties permitted by law,” therefore we remand for correction of the record to show that the sentence in Ca…