TERRY RAY THOMPSON, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed an upward sentencing departure for vehicular homicide because the trial judge relied on factors already incorporated in the guidelines, an unconvicted offense, and an inadequately explained aggravating circumstance.
An upward departure from sentencing guidelines is invalid when based on factors already included in the guidelines calculation, unconvicted offenses, or aggravating circumstances lacking sufficient explanation.
[1] An upward departure from sentencing guidelines cannot be based on factors already incorporated into the guideline scoresheet or on unconvicted offenses.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThompson pleaded nolo contendere to vehicular homicide involving driving under the influence, excessive speed, and failure to maintain control. The tr…
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 Blood Alcohol Level cases and more on FLexlaw
BARFIELD, Judge.
Terry Ray Thompson appeals the trial court’s upward departure from the sentencing guidelines recommended sentence. We reverse and remand for resentencing.
The appellant pled nolo contendere to one count of vehicular homicide which charged, in part, that he operated a motor vehicle “in a reckless manner likely to cause the death of, or great bodily harm to another, by driving under the influence of alcohol to the point of having impaired faculties, driving at an excessive rate of speed, failing to keep the vehicle under control, and failure to change lanes properly_”
The trial judge stated the following three reasons for departure: 1) defendant was driving with .13 blood alcohol level, 2) defendant was driving while license was suspended; 3) defendant was on probation at the time of the offense for driving with a suspended license.
The first reason was an integral part of the charge and contains no explanation as to why this blood alcohol reading is a circumstance so egregious as to require departure.
The second reason for departure considers an offense for which the offender has not been convicted and is invalid.
The third reason, concerning probationary status of the appellant, has been factored into the scoresheet under legal constraint at the time of the offense and will not support an independent reason for departure. The sentence is REVERSED and REMANDED to the trial court for resentencing.
THOMPSON and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lumpkin v. State, 510 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…es that the emotional trauma of the children is a valid reason for departing from the sentencing guidelines. It is improper to depart from sentencing guidelines based upon crimes for which a defendant was not charged or convicted. Thompson v. State, 493 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(11); cf. Weems v. State, 469 So. 2d 128 (Fla.1985) (prior arrests without convictions are not a valid reason for departing from sentencing guidelines): Sellers v. State, 499 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (…