FREDDIE CLEMONS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1987-05-15
No. 86-1368
FRANK, A.C.J., and SANDERLIN, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F., (Ret.) J., concur.
508 So. 2d 430 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1987) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion for speedy trial discharge. We affirm the denial because there was sufficient evidence from which the trial court could conclude that appellant was not “in custody” for purposes of the speedy trial rule until his arrest for the underlying charges on July 23, 1985. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.191(a)(4); State v. Christian, 442 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Accordingly, appellant’s November 19, 1985, motion for discharge was premature.

Appellant, a juvenile at the time he committed the offenses, also contends the trial court erred in sentencing him as an adult without complying with section 39.-111(6), Florida Statutes (1985). That section requires a trial court to set forth written reasons for the imposition of adult sanctions. The state concedes this error and we agree. See State v. Rhoden, 448 So. 2d 1013 (Fla.1984). We reverse appellant’s sentences, and remand to the trial court for resentencing in compliance with section 39.111(6).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing.

FRANK, A.C.J., and SANDERLIN, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F., (Ret.) J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Weigel v. State, 581 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
    …act and the reasons to impose adult sanctions. Failure to comply with this section requires reversal of the sentence. See Dinks v. State, 561 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Dix v. State, 533 So. 2d 1189 (Fla. 2d DCA [*635] 1988); Clemons v. State, 508 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Reversed and remanded for new trial. SCHEB, A.C.J., and RYDER, J., concur.…
  • Boudreau v. State, 546 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
    …raises one issue: whether the trial court erred by failing to provide written reasons for imposing adult sanctions against Boudreau, who was seventeen at the time these offenses were committed. See § 39.111(7)(d), Fla.Stat. (1987); Clemons v. State, 508 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). The state argues that since Boudreau was “direct-filed” as an adult2 he was not “transferred” from the juvenile to the adult system as that term is employed in section 39.111. They cite Duke v. State, 541 So. 2d 1170 (Fla.1989),…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw