JOHN HENRY YOUNG, 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.
The court held that the trial court erred in departing from the presumptive sentencing range based on the reasons provided.
[1] A defendant's inability to formulate a rehabilitation plan or recognize chemical dependency does not, by itself, constitute clear and convincing reasons for an upward dep…
[2] A defendant's alcohol abuse problem, standing alone, is not a valid reason to aggravate a sentence under sentencing guidelines.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant pleaded guilty to uttering a forgery and was given a presumptive sentence of any nonstate prison sanction. The trial court departed upwa…
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 Clear And Convincing Reasons For Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
SHARP, Judge.
The sole issue in this case is whether or not the trial court erred in departing from the presumptive sentence range in the sentencing guidelines.1 The court sentenced Young to thirty months in the state prison system, an upward departure of one bracket. Young’s presumptive sentence was any nonstate prison sanction, based on a total sentencing score of eighteen points for uttering a forgery. We vacate the sentence.
In this case the trial judge gave as his written reasons for departing:
Defendant’s inability to put together a plan for rehabilitation and his refusal to recognize his chemical dependency.
At the sentencing hearing, Young freely admitted he stole checks, forged two of them, and wrongfully obtained money for them. He admitted his behavior pattern was flawed, and said he wanted to correct it. He had a full time job at the time of sentencing, and had successfully completed probation in connection with a prior offense. He asked not to be given a prison sentence. He suggested probation, community service, restitution, and attendance at A.A. meetings. We do not think the two reasons given by the trial judge are clear and convincing ones to justify a departure sentence. It is not the responsibility or obligation of a defendant to plan his own punishment and rehabilitation. That is what the state employees involved in sentencing and trial judges are supposed to be doing.
Nor is the fact that a defendant has an alcohol abuse problem a valid reason by itself to aggravate a sentence under the guidelines. Vance v. State, 475 So. 2d 1362 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). If jail time is needed in the trial court’s view, a county jail term could be resorted to, and/or combined with mandatory A.A. attendance for a time on probation.
Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for sentencing within the presumptive sentence range of “any nonstate prison sanction.”
SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED.
COBB, C.J., and UPCHURCH, J., concur. . Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(ll).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moore v. State, 492 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…cohol abuse and need for long term counseling.” Any concern the trial court may have harbored regarding Moore’s alcohol abuse problem cannot form the basis for departing from the guidelines and imposing a state prison sanction. See Young v. State, 480 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Moreover, the trial court’s reference to the repeated battery of Moore’s spouse and to the need for rehabilitation are based factually on Moore’s prior convictions which had been scored in determining his presumptive sentence th…
Authorities Cited
- Vance v. State, 475 So. 2d 1362 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)