ALPHONSE GRIFFIN, 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.
Griffin appealed his sentencing after pleading guilty to battery on a law enforcement officer while armed and grand theft, and nolo contendere to drug possession charges. The court affirmed his three-year mandatory minimum prison sentence but reversed and remanded regarding concurrent probation terms, holding that under the sentencing guidelines in effect at the time of the crimes, the total sanction (incarceration plus probation) cannot exceed the maximum guideline range without a written reason for departure.
The three-year mandatory minimum prison sentence was properly imposed and is affirmed. However, the concurrent probation terms were improper because under the sentencing guidelines in effect when the crimes were committed, a split sentence (combination of incarceration and probation) cannot exceed the maximum guideline range without a clear and convincing written reason for departure.
[1] A mandatory minimum sentence required by statute may exceed the recommended guideline sentence.
[2] A defendant is entitled to be sentenced in accordance with the guidelines in effect at the time the crimes were committed.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“If a split sentence is imposed (i.e., a combination of state prison and probation supervision), the incarcerative portion imposed shall not be less than the minimum of the guideline range, and the total sanction imposed cannot exceed the maximum guideline range.”
Establishes the controlling guideline rule that total sanctions in split sentences cannot exceed the guideline maximum
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn June 14, 1984, Griffin was charged with battery on a law enforcement officer while armed with a firearm, grand theft, possession of cocaine, and po…
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 Guideline Range cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Judge.
This is an appeal from a guidelines sentence. Griffin contends that the sentence exceeds the guidelines because the combination of incarceration and probation exceeds the total permissible sanction. We agree.
On June 14, 1984, Griffin was charged with battery on a law enforcement officer while armed with a firearm, grand theft, possession of cocaine and possession of cannabis over twenty grams. He plead guilty to the first two charges, and nolo contendere to the last two charges. His guidelines scoresheet totaled 125 points, suggesting a sentence of community control or 12-30 months’ incarceration. The trial court correctly sentenced Griffin to the mandatory minimum sentence of three years’ incarceration required by section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (1983), because the mandatory penalty exceeds the guideline sentence. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(9). The correctness of this portion of the sentence is not questioned on appeal.
Appellant is correct in his assertion that he was entitled to be sentenced in accordance with the guidelines in effect when the crimes were committed. See Brown v. State, 460 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Committee note (d)(12) to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(12) as it existed prior to its amendment on July 1, 1984, provided:
If a split sentence is imposed (i.e., a combination of state prison and probation supervision), the incarcerative portion imposed shall not be less than the minimum of the guideline range, and the total sanction imposed cannot exceed the maximum guideline range.
Although this court has split on the question of whether sentences such as are imposed here are truly “split sentences,” we are bound by the recent decision of this court that says they are. O’Brien v. State, 10 F.L.W. —, (Fla. 5th DCA Aug. 15,1985). Therefore it was improper in this case to impose a sanction greater than the mandatory minimum sentence, without stating a written reason for departure. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(12), supra. The three year sentence of incarceration is affirmed. The three concurrent terms of probation are vacated and shall not be imposed unless the trial court states a clear and convincing reason for departure.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
DAUKSCH and SHARP, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Alphonse Griffin, 489 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1986)…OVERTON, Justice. This is a petition to review Griffin v. State, 474 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), which directly conflicts with our decision in State v. Jackson, 478 So. 2d 1054 (Fla.1985). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. We quash that portion of the [*21] district court’s opinion which states that Alphon…
Authorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 460 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)