JOHN AMREIN, 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.
Appellant Amrein challenges concurrent sentences of 40 months jail time and 15 years probation imposed after conviction of five felony counts of grand theft and five misdemeanor counts of contracting without a license. The Florida appellate court affirmed the sentence, holding that the trial court properly applied sentencing guidelines to the felonies separately from the misdemeanors and that the consecutive misdemeanor sentences did not violate applicable statutes.
The trial court's sentences were proper because: (1) sentencing guidelines apply only to felonies, not misdemeanors, so the trial court correctly sentenced appellant separately for each category of offense; (2) the trial court did not depart from the guidelines in sentencing for the primary felony offenses; (3) the consecutive misdemeanor sentences of eight months each were within the statutory limitations for first-degree misdemeanors; and (4) statutory restrictions on county jail terms do not apply to consecutive misdemeanor sentences.
[1] Sentencing guidelines apply only to felonies, not to misdemeanor convictions.
[2] A trial court may impose consecutive county jail sentences for multiple misdemeanor convictions, even if the aggregate sentence exceeds one year, provided each individual…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the sentencing guidelines "shall be applied to all felonies, except capital felonies, committed on or after October 1, 1983.... " Under this section, the guidelines apply to felonies alone, and the trial court properly sentenced appellant separately for his felony and misdemeanor convictions.”
Establishes that sentencing guidelines do not apply to misdemeanors, justifying separate sentencing for each category of offense
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAmrein pled nolo contendere on November 22, 1985 to five counts of grand theft and five counts of contracting without a license. The trial court sente…
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 Recommended Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of concurrent sentences of 40 months jail time and 15 years probation upon conviction of five felony counts of grand theft and five misdemeanor counts of contracting without a license. He contends the trial court departed from the recommended guidelines sentence of any nonstate prison sanction for the felony convictions by sentencing him to 40 months county jail time for the misdemeanor convictions without providing written reasons for departure as required by Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701. We affirm.
Appellant on November 22, 1985 pled nolo contendere to five counts of grand theft, in violation of section 812.014, Florida Statutes, and five counts of contracting without a license, in violation of section 489.127, Florida Statutes. The trial court sentenced appellant within the recommended guidelines sentence of any non-state prison sanction to three years probation on each felony count, with the sentences to run consecutively. The trial court sentenced appellant separately for the misdemeanor convictions, imposing eight months county jail time for each of the five misdemeanor counts, with those sentences to run consecutively to each other and concurrently with the felony sentences.
Appellant contends the trial court, in effect, circumvented the recommended guidelines sentence by imposing three years and four months jail time on the misdemeanor convictions, to be followed by the remaining 12 years probation for the felony convictions.
Section 921.001(4)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that the sentencing guidelines “shall be applied to all felonies, except capital felonies, committed on or after October 1, 1983.... ” Under this section, the guidelines apply to felonies alone, and the trial court properly sentenced appellant separately for his felony and misdemeanor convictions. Appellant’s misdemeanor convictions were scored on the guidelines scoresheet as additional offenses at conviction, adding four points to the eighteen points appellant received for the felony convictions. Factors accounted for in the sentencing guidelines scoresheet may not be used as a basis for departure from the recommended sentence. Scott v. State, 469 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
The trial court here, however, did not depart from the guidelines in sentencing appellant for the primary offenses.
Section 775.082(4)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that a person convicted of a misdemeanor of the first degree may be incarcerated for a term not in excess of one year.
The trial court here sentenced appellant within the limitations of section 775.-082(4)(a) to eight months jail time on each of his first degree misdemeanor convic tions.
Section 922.051, Florida Statutes, proscribes any county jail term exceeding one year where a statute expressly directs that imprisonment be in a state prison. In Dade County v. Baker, 265 So. 2d 700 (Fla.1972), the Florida Supreme Court found that section 922.051 applies only to felonies. Following Baker, the court in Mancebo v. State, 338 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), affirmed three consecutive one year sentences in the county jail for three misdemeanor convictions, finding that section 922.051 does not apply to consecutive misdemeanor sentences. On the authority of Baker and Mancebo, we find that the five consecutive sentences of eight months each imposed in this case for the five misdemeanor convictions were not improper.
Accordingly, the order is affirmed.
BOOTH, C.J., concurs.
ZEHMER, J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Armstrong v. State, 656 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 1995)…nty jail sentences that exceed one year for misdemeanors, as opposed to felonies, are permitted. Carson v. State, 635 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Gwynn v. Orange County Bd. of County Comm’rs, 527 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Amrein v. State, 504 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Mancebo v. State, 338 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). We acknowledge that under this interpretation it is possible that a person convicted of two felonies could be sentenced to only one year in county jail, depending upon the se…
-
Kline v. State, 509 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…f the prisoner’s cumulative sentences is not more than 1 year. It has been held that section 922.051 applies only to felony sentences and is not applicable to misdemeanor sentences. Dade County v. Baker, 265 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1972); Amrein v. State, 504 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Moreover, the sentencing guidelines apply only to felonies and are not applicable to sentences for misdemean- or violations. § 921.001(4)(a), Fla.Stat. (1985); Amrein v. State, 504 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). We find no basi…1 / 3
-
Gwynn v. Orange Cnty. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs, 527 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…ebo v. State, 338 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) the court approved county jail incarceration for a period of three years resulting from three consecutive misdemeanor sentences of one year each. The First District followed Mancebo in Amrein v. State, 504 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) and approved consecutive eight month county jail sentences for each of five misdemeanor counts, the sentences to run consecutively to each other. The writ of habeas corpus was properly denied. AFFIRMED. SHARP, CJ., concurs. D…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Scott v. State, 469 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Dade Cnty. v. Honorable Paul Baker, 265 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1972)
- Mancebo v. State, 338 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)