JOHN LESLIE HILL, 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 trial court erred in departing from sentencing guidelines without written reasons, relying on a precedent decided after the original sentencing.
Appellant was convicted of burglary, grand theft, and resisting arrest and sentenced above the recommended guidelines range. The trial court cited app…
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 Written Reasons For Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Following the jury trial, appellant was convicted of one count of burglary, one count of grand theft and one count of resisting arrest with. violence. The trial court sentenced appellant to thirty years’ incarceration for count one, ten years for count two and one year for count three. The sentencing guidelines called for a sentence of between twelve and seventeen years. The trial court gave no written reasons for its departure from the guidelines, but relied on its finding that appellant was an habitual offender. Appellant appeals his conviction and sentence and raises three points on appeal. Points one and three are without merit.
We affirm the conviction, but reverse the sentencing on the authority of Whitehead v. State, 498 So. 2d 863 (Fla.1986), which was decided after the trial court’s decision. We remand to the trial court for resentencing in accordance with the applicable law.
AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART.
DOWNEY and LETTS, JJ., and LINDSEY, HUBERT R., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 566 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…tion or work release. Appellant contends the trial court erred when it refused to permit him to withdraw his plea of nolo contendere. He argues that the state did not reaffirm its recommendation pursuant to the plea agreement, citing Curry v. State, 513 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). We find appellant’s reliance on Curry misplaced since here the state, albeit reluctantly, reaffirmed its recommendation pursuant to the plea agreement. We are not persuaded by appellant's argument that the state breached the pl…
-
Negron v. State, 519 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…ommunity service, we think he sufficiently raised this matter in his petition for reconsideration of sentence. Therefore the trial court’s denial of Neg-ron’s petition insofar as he sought to withdraw his nolo plea was erroneous. See Curry v. State, 513 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Accordingly, we remand this case to the trial court for the purpose of giving Neg-ron the opportunity to withdraw his plea and proceed to trial, if he still wishes to do do so.1 REMANDED. COBB, J. and LEE, R.E., Jr., Asso…
-
Bolen v. State, 578 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…PER CURIAM. We reverse the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea and remand for trial. See Lee v. State, 501 So. 2d 591 (Fla.1987); Curry v. State, 513 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.170(f). HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Whitehead v. State, 498 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 1986)