RICKY THURMAN BRUMLEY, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 trial court cannot articulate new reasons for departure from the Guidelines on remand if the original reasons were invalidated, even if new valid reasons existed at the time of the original sentencing.
The First District Court of Appeal certified a question regarding whether a trial court could depart from sentencing Guidelines on remand with new rea…
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 Certified Question Of Great Public Importance cases and more on FLexlaw
BARKETT, Justice.
In Brumley v. State, 512 So. 2d 220 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), the First District certified a question of great public importance already posed in Morganti v. State, 510 So. 2d 1182, 1184 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987):
Whether, when the sole reason initially given for departure from the Guidelines was held to be valid by appellate courts at the time of sentencing but is subsequently held invalid by the Supreme Court, the trial court may on remand again depart from the Guidelines, if the new reasons given existed at the time of the original sentencing and are valid reasons for departure.
We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla.Const. In Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla.1987), we held that a trial , court must articulate all of the reasons for departure in the original order and cannot enunciate any new reasons for departure after reversal of the original sentence by an appellate court.
Accordingly, we answer the certified question in the negative, quash the decision of the district court, and remand with instructions that the trial court impose a guidelines sentence.
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dean v. State, 523 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…below filed briefs in this case. In Shull, supra, the Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court cannot enunciate any new reasons for departure after an appellate court reverses reasons given for the original departure. Accord Brumley v. State, 520 So. 2d 275 (Fla.1988); King v. State, 520 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). In the instant case, the trial court based appellant’s original departure sentence solely upon the habitual offender statute, Section 775.084, Florida Statutes, which is prohibited by Whi…
-
Slay v. State, 534 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla.1987). Slay has asserted correctly that the trial court may not, on remand, exceed the guidelines by relying on new reasons for departure. See also Morganti v. State, 524 So. 2d 641 (Fla.1988); Brumley v. State, 520 So. 2d 275 (Fla.1988); Hays v. State, 526 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). The State has conceded this point. However, given the facts of this case, the record supports an affirmance of Slay’s departure sentence. In the first sentencing, by including the revie…
-
Hardimon v. State, 527 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…iginal reason for departure, but again departed based upon the emotional trauma to the victim. We reverse and remand with directions that appellant be sentenced within the guidelines. See Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla.1987); Brumley v. State, 520 So. 2d 275 (Fla.1988), and Harris v. State, 520 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). REVERSED and REMANDED. ANSTEAD, DELL and STONE, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1987)
- Hughes v. State, 510 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Morganti v. State, 510 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Brumley v. State, 512 So. 2d 220 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)