JOSEPH DOHN, 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's written reasons adequately justified departing from the sentencing guidelines due to the defendant's criminal history and failure to rehabilitate.
Defendant, on probation for theft and burglary, committed another burglary while on probation in another state. Upon revocation of his Florida probati…
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 Criminal History cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals a sentence departing from the sentencing guidelines. We affirm.
In 1982 defendant was placed on concurrent terms of five years of probation for one conviction of theft and one conviction of burglary. While living in Ohio within the terms of his Florida probation, defendant committed a burglary for which he received a year in custody in Ohio. The Ohio burglary was also the basis of a charge of violating his Florida probation. Upon revoking his probation, the trial court sentenced defendant to concurrent terms of four years in prison, a sentence which was two cells higher than the sentence recommended by the guidelines.
On appeal the defendant contends that the written reasons given by the trial court for the departure sentence were inadequate to justify departure. We disagree. The reasons given by the trial court adequately show the court’s concern over defendant’s long history of this particular type of crime (burglary) and his failure to rehabilitate himself despite past probation sentences. These types of reasons have been found to justify a departure of more than the one cell authorized by Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.701(d)(14) for a probation revocation. See, e.g., Booker v. State, 482 So. 2d 414, (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Jean v. State, 455 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
As was stated in Pentaude v. State, 478 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), “Where a trial judge finds that the underlying reasons for violation of probation (as opposed to the mere fact of violation) are more than a minor infraction and are sufficiently egregious, he is entitled to depart from the presumptive guidelines range and impose an appropriate sentence within the statutory limit.”
Affirmed.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and LEHAN and FRANK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Riggins v. State, 489 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…so, the Sec [*182] ond District Court of Appeal has affirmed the trial court’s departure if the reason is based on a defendant’s long history of a particular type of crime (burglary) and failure to rehabilitate despite past probation. Dohn v. State, 482 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). See also, Adams v. State, 483 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (departure is valid where defendant has displayed a pattern of behavior which reflects a flagrant disregard of the criminal justice system, is not able to meet the requi…
-
Fabelo v. State, 488 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…in egregious circumstances, a trial court may depart from the recommendation of the guidelines based on a finding that a defendant has exhibited an escalating pattern of criminal activity. See Patty v. State, 486 So. 2d 16 (Fla.1986); Dohn v. State, 482 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Keen v. State, 481 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Booker v. State, 482 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). However, such a finding must be factually supported in the record. State v. Mischler, 488 So. 2d 523 (Fla.1986); Brown v. Sta…
-
Brown v. State, 488 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…ourt noted that the underlying reason for appellant’s violation was his “continued substance abuse,” this is not sufficiently egregious to justify more than the one cell departure already allowed for the fact of the violation. Compare Dohn v. State, 482 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Booker v. State, 482 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Likewise, the appellant’s refusal to “adhere to the requirements of alternate sentencing,” as it relates to a single violation of community control, is insufficient by itself to…
Authorities Cited
- Dilar S. Booker v. State, 482 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Jean v. State, 455 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Miranda v. Hance Constr. Co., 478 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)