DWIGHT FLEMING, 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 habitual offender status cannot be used as a basis for departing from sentencing guidelines.
Appellant was resentenced to nine years after his initial sentence was vacated. The trial court found him to be a habitual offender based on prior con…
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 Departure From Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellant, Dwight Fleming, appeals the nine-year term of imprisonment the trial court ordered him to serve when it resen-tenced him after this court vacated his initial sentence. 480 So. 2d 715. Appellant contends that the trial court, contrary to this court’s order, failed to make written findings in support of appellant’s habitual offender status, and failed to issue written reasons for exceeding the guidelines.
At the sentencing hearing, the court found that the state had proved the requirements of the habitual offender statute, that appellant’s present offense had been committed within five years of a prior burglary in 1982 for which appellant had not been pardoned, and that appellant’s presentence report showed that he had committed another burglary in 1978 and had been incarcerated for both the 1982 and 1978 offenses with no evidence of rehabilitation. The court concluded that appellant’s sentence required enhancement to protect the citizens of Florida and again sentenced appellant to serve nine years in prison.
The court’s written findings satisfied section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1984) since the court specified the two specific offenses it relied on when it found appellant was a habitual felony offender. However, the supreme court has now held that habitual offender status may not be used as a basis for departing from the guidelines. Whitehead v. State, 498 So. 2d 868 (Fla.1986).
We must, therefore, reverse appellant’s sentence and remand for resentencing pursuant to the recommended guidelines sentence.
LEHAN and FRANK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dudeck v. State, 516 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…tehead v. State, 498 So. 2d 863 (Fla.1986). In the matter at hand, the sole basis for departure is invalid. Whitehead. Dudeck’s sentence is reversed and we remand for resentencing consistent with the appropriate guidelines penalty. Fleming v. State, 499 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Dudeck claims the trial court assessed fees and costs against him at the sentencing hearing contrary to the holding in Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984). We disagree. The record discloses the trial court’s announcement…
Authorities Cited
- Fleming v. State, 480 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Reed A. Bryan, III v. Century Nat'l Bank, 498 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 1986)