TOMMY LEE JOHNSON, 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.
A written statement of reasons is required for sentencing departures from the guidelines, and an oral pronouncement is insufficient.
The defendant was found guilty of aggravated assault and shooting into an occupied dwelling. The trial court sentenced him above the recommended guide…
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.
The appellant, Tommy Lee Johnson, seeks review of the judgments and sentences entered after a jury found him guilty of aggravated assault with a firearm and shooting into an occupied dwelling. Of the points the appellant raised on appeal, we find merit only in his contention that the trial court erred in sentencing him outside the guidelines without providing a written statement of reasons for the departure. We, accordingly, affirm the judgments but reverse the sentences and remand for resentencing.
Although the guidelines scoresheet indicated a sentencing range of thirty months to three and one-half years imprisonment, the court sentenced the appellant to fifteen years imprisonment for shooting into an occupied dwelling and a consecutive term of five years imprisonment with a minimum mandatory term of three years for aggravated assault. Although the trial court orally announced its reasons for imposing the departure sentences, the sentences were not accompanied by a written statement of reasons for the departure. Instead, on the scoresheet under reasons for departure, is written “see transcript to court announced clear and convincing reasons to depart.”
Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(ll) requires that any sentence outside of the guidelines must be accompanied by a written statement delineating the reasons for the departure. A transcription of reasons for departure orally stated by the trial court does not fulfill this requirement. See Beal v. State, 478 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We, accordingly, must reverse the sentences imposed and remand for re-sentencing.
Reversed and remanded.
DANAHY, C.J., and SCHOONOVER and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 558 So. 2d 1051 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…PER CURIAM. Appellant Tommy Lee Johnson was re-sentenced pursuant to this court’s opinion in Johnson v. State, 517 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 2d [*1052] DCA 1987).1 After remand the trial court imposed the same sentence as before, offering the following written justification for departing from the guideline recommendation: Defendant’s continuing, persistent, and escalating pattern…
-
Trimble v. State, 591 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…W. Trimble following his plea of guilty to kidnapping, arson, lewd and lascivious conduct, and aggravated assault. We reverse. First, the trial court erred in failing to provide contemporaneous written reasons for departure. See Johnson v. State, 517 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Furthermore, the departure reasons are prohibited by State v. Rousseau, 509 So. 2d 281 (Fla.1987). For instance, the trial court relied upon the child victim’s emotional trauma as a reason for departure. Because the expert psycho…
Authorities Cited
- Beal v. State, 478 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)