HARREL BRADDY, 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.
Court reversed denial of rule 3.850 motion and remanded for resentencing, holding that a trial court must provide written reasons when departing from sentencing guidelines by more than one cell.
A trial court must provide written reasons when departing from sentencing guidelines by more than one cell, and absence of such reasons constitutes fundamental error warranting relief.
[1] A trial court must provide written reasons when departing from sentencing guidelines by more than one cell, and successive motions under rule 3.850 are permitted when cha…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a sentencing error which causes an individual to be restrained for time longer than that allowed by law is fundamental and can be heard in any and every legal manner possible”
Court cited Reynolds v. State for the proposition that fundamental sentencing errors are reviewable regardless of procedural bars.
Braddy was sentenced by a trial court that departed from sentencing guidelines without written reasons. He had previously filed a successful rule 3.80…
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 Fundamental Error In Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
GLICKSTEIN, Judge.
We reverse the trial court’s order which denied appellant’s motion for relief pursuant to rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and remand for resentencing with direction that if the trial court intends to depart greater than one cell, it do so with written reasons.
Appellant successfully filed an earlier motion pursuant to rule 3.800, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, challenging his sentencing on a different ground; namely, the trial court’s retention of jurisdiction. There is no rule which has been adopted by this state’s highest court which prevents our consideration of the merits of appellant’s present motion, notwithstanding the earlier motion. Even rule 3.850, which limits successive motions, provides that a “motion to vacate a sentence which exceeds the limits provided by law may be filed at any time.” Rule 3.800 contains no proscription against successive motions.
In this case appellant’s argument is a valid one; namely, the absence of written reasons for the trial court’s departure from the guidelines. In the absence of a valid reason, appellant’s confinement would be longer than lawfully permitted. The Fifth District Court of Appeal in Reynolds v. State, 429 So. 2d 1331, 1333 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), appropriately stated that a sentencing error which causes an individual to be restrained for time longer than that allowed by law is fundamental and can be heard in any and every legal manner possible.
DOWNEY and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davis v. State, 661 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 1995)…OVERTON, Justice. We have for review State v. Davis, 639 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), based on express and direct conflict with the opinion in Braddy v. State, 520 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 528 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 1988). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. This case involves an alleged sentencing error dispute in which Darren Keith Davis seeks relief from his departure sentence through coll…
-
Barnes v. State, 661 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…DCA 1995), and Morris, 605 So. 2d at 514. Reversed and remanded with directions. DANAHY, A.C.J., and PARKER and WHATLEY, JJ., concur. . Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 contains no proscription against successive motions. Braddy v. State, 520 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 528 So. 2d 1183 (Fla.1988).…
-
Harrel F. Braddy v. State, 593 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…STONE, Judge. This court reversed appellant’s thirty year sentence in Braddy v. State, 520 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). The sentence was imposed following a plea to a thirty year “cap” on charges of armed robbery, armed kidnapping, armed burglary, escape, and burglary. At the initial sentencing the scoresheet submitted was for guideline category…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Reynolds v. State, 429 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)