RONNIE D. BROWN, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
An affirmative selection to be sentenced under the guidelines is sufficient, and the trial judge had grounds for departure.
Defendant selected guideline sentencing, and the trial court imposed a departure sentence. The district court reviewed the sentence and certified a qu…
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 Parole Eligibility cases and more on FLexlaw
McDONALD, Justice.
We accepted jurisdiction to answer a certified question of the district court of appeal in this case. Brown v. State, 464 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The court posed the following question:
WHETHER A DEFENDANT’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF PROTECTION AGAINST EX POST FACTO LAWS IS VIOLATED, WHEN HE AFFIRMATIVELY SELECTS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 921.001(4)(a), FLORIDA STATUTES (1983), TO BE SENTENCED PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES BUT THERE IS NO SHOWING IN THE RECORD THAT THE COURT EXPLAINED THAT BY SELECTING GUIDELINES SENTENCING THE DEFENDANT WAIVES HIS ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE.
Id. at 194. We answered a similar question in the negative in Cochran v. State, 476 So. 2d 207 (Fla.1985), and held that an affirmative selection to be sentenced under the guidelines is all that is required.
Brown asks us to review other portions of the district court’s opinion, particularly in view of our decision in Albritton v. State, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla.1985). We decline to do so, although a few words are in order on one of these issues. The district court found that it should not review the extent of the departure sentence; this is contrary to our holding in Albritton. We, however, have reviewed the record and find that under the facts of this case the trial judge had good grounds for departure and that, although one ground for departure is questionable, it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that the exclusion of that ground would affect neither the judge’s determination to depart nor the extent of the departure. We find no abuse of discretion by the trial judge in imposing the sentence in this case. The opinion of the district court is accordingly approved.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hall v. State, 826 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2002)…in violation of section 812.025, Florida Statutes (1999).3 The Fourth Dis [*270] trict Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s adjudication and agreed with the reasoning and holding in Brown v. State, 464 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), approved, 487 So. 2d 1073 (Fla.1986): Defendant’s third point on appeal is that section 812.025, Florida Statutes (1983), prohibits his conviction and sentence on the two offenses of theft and dealing in stolen property because the same firearms were the subject of both off…
-
Bowles v. Singletary, 698 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 1997)…ding is consistent with our opinions in the area of sentencing guidelines, where we have held that an affirmative election to accept a newly created program waives any potential ex post facto argument the petitioner may have had. See Brown v. State, 487 So. 2d 1073 (Fla.1986); Cochran v. State, 476 So. 2d 207 (Fla.1985); cf. Joyner v. State, 594 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)(holding that acceptance of community control constituted waiver of right to contest supervision upon revocation), approved, 618 So. 2d 20…
-
Blackmon v. State, 121 So. 3d 535 (Fla. 2013)…ial court erred in adjudicating him guilty of both grand theft and dealing in stolen property, contrary to section 812.025. Id. at 269. The Fourth District discussed Brown v. State, 464 So. 2d 193, 195 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), approved on other grounds, 487 So. 2d 1073 (Fla.1986). Hall, 767 So. 2d at 562. In Brown, the First District held section 812.025 “inapplicable in situations where ... the defendant pleads nolo contendere to both offenses pursuant to a plea bargaining agreement. By its own terms, the statute…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- City OF Atl. Beach v. Bull, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1985)
- Albritton v. State, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1985)
- Brown v. State, 464 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Cochran v. State, 476 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 1985)