HASAN ABDULLAH, 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 the reasons given for departing from the sentencing guidelines were invalid because they were inherent in the offense or unsupported by the record.
The appellant was found guilty of robbery with a deadly weapon, and the recommended sentencing range was 3½-4½ years. The trial court departed from th…
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 Robbery With A Deadly Weapon cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Judge.
The appellant Hasan Abdullah appeals his aggravated guidelines sentence for robbery with a deadly weapon. We reverse.
The appellant was charged with and found guilty by a jury of robbery with a deadly weapon. The appellant’s scoresheet indicated a recommended sentencing range of 3½-4½ years’ incarceration. The trial court departed from the recommended range and sentenced the appellant to a term of life imprisonment. The court wrote as its reasons for this departure: “multiple victims in bank and at scene of capture; potential for danger to victims at scene of crime and at point of capture.”
The numbr .- of victims and the potential for danger to those victims are factors inherent in an armed robbery and are therefore already taken into account in calculating the guidelines sentence for that offense. Thorne v. State, 496 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Furthermore, the record contains no evidence that there were victims at the point of capture or that there existed the potential for danger to bystanders at the point of capture. Accordingly, because of the absence of valid reasons to support the aggravation of the appellant’s sentence, this cause is remanded for resentencing within the guidelines.
Reversed and remanded.'
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crosby v. State, 518 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…his case, it was only the victim of each crime whose safety was endangered. There were no persons involved in either crime other than the defendant and the two victims. Compare Lumpkin v. State, 510 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Abdullah v. State, 510 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) and Thorne v. State, 496 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) with Scurry v. State, 489 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1986); Ventosa v. State, 510 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Rey v. State, 509 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Bulger v. State, 509 S…
Authorities Cited
- Thorne v. State, 496 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)