BILLY GEORGE MCPHAUL, A/K/A HAROLD WILLIAMS, 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.
Defendant's sentence for violation of probation was remanded because the trial court applied sentencing guidelines to an offense committed before the guidelines were adopted without defendant's affirmative selection of guidelines sentencing, but resentencing was unnecessary since the imposed sentences were the maximum permissible under general law.
A trial court may not apply sentencing guidelines to an offense committed prior to the guidelines' adoption without the defendant's affirmative selection of guidelines sentencing, but resentencing is not required if the imposed sentences are the maximum permissible under general law.
[1] A trial court may not apply sentencing guidelines to an offense committed prior to the guidelines' adoption without the defendant's affirmative selection of guidelines se…
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 intelligenceDefendant was sentenced for violation of probation. The trial court applied sentencing guidelines to an offense committed before the guidelines were a…
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 Presumptive Guidelines Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
LEHAN, Judge.
Defendant appeals from the sentence imposed upon him upon his violation of probation.
Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in sentencing defendant pursuant to the sentencing guidelines for an offense committed prior to the adoption of the guidelines without defendant having affirmatively selected guidelines sentencing. The state acknowledges that the record does not reflect such an affirmative selection. Therefore, we remand for the sentence to be corrected to reflect that it is a nonguidelines sentence. As in Hall v. State, 482 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), “Resentencing is not necessary since the trial court imposed the maximum sentences permissible under general law.” See Hart v. State, 464 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
For the same reason we need not and do not reach defendant’s additional contentions that the trial court erred in exceeding the guidelines without first being informed of defendant’s presumptive guidelines sentence, in relying upon impermissible reasons for exceeding the guidelines, in delegating to the state attorney the preparation of the statement of reasons for exceeding the guidelines, and in excessively exceeding the guidelines presumptive sentencing range.
Remanded for correction of sentence.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McKINNEY v. Honorable Theron A. Yawn, Jr., 625 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
-
The Honorable Jonathan T. Colby v. McNEILL, 595 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…v. denied, 541 So. 2d 1172 (Fla.1988); Brown v. State, 527 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 534 So. 2d 398 (Fla.1988); Lobik v. State, 506 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); George v. Trettis, 500 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); State v. Williams, 497 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Perez v. State, 474 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 484 So. 2d 10 (Fla.1986); State v. Hutley, 474 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 486 So. 2d 596 (Fla.1986). . See, e.g., State v. Rodriguez, 483 So. 2d 75…
-
Albert Banks v. State, 691 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…t to a speedy trial, and when discovery is not promptly furnished, the court may continue a ease at the state’s expense beyond the speedy trial limits even if such continuance effectively results in the discharge of the defendant. State v. Williams, 497 So. 2d 730 (consolidated) (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). State v. Del Gaudio, 445 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).” [emphasis supplied.] George v. Trettis, 500 So. 2d 588, 589 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). In State v. Miller, 672 So. 2d 855 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. granted, 682 So. 2d…
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
- Hardinghaus v. Enslen, 464 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Hall v. State, 482 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)