STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
BRUCE ALAN VANKOOTEN, 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.
Florida Supreme Court held that when sentencing guidelines prescribe community control or incarceration, imposing both constitutes a departure requiring written reasons, rejecting the Second District's interpretation that 'or' permits both sanctions simultaneously.
When a sentencing guideline prescribes community control or incarceration, imposing both sanctions constitutes a departure from the guidelines requiring proper written reasons.
[1] When a sentencing guideline prescribes community control or incarceration as alternatives, the imposition of both sanctions constitutes a departure from the guidelines re…
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“The guideline clearly states that the appropriate sentence was community control or incarceration. Any change in that presumptive guideline must occur through appropriate legislative and court rule action, rather than by judicial construction.”
Court's rejection of the Second District's interpretation that 'or' permits both sanctions
VanKooten was sentenced to both community control and incarceration when the guideline prescribed one or the other.…
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 Judicial Construction Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
This is a petition to review VanKooten v. State, 512 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), which held that when the presumptive guideline sentence directs community con trol or incarceration, the imposition of both represents a departure from the sentencing guidelines, requiring proper written reasons for the departure. In so holding, the court relied on its decision in Hankey v. State, 505 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), and certified conflict with the Second District Court of Appeal’s decision in Francis v. State, 487 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). We have jurisdiction, article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution, and approve VanKooten and Hankey and disapprove the Second District’s decision in Francis.
In Francis, the district court recognized that its holding converted “the applicable range to ‘community control and 12 to 30 months’ incarceration,’ ” explaining that “the use of the word ‘or’ in this cell was not intended to make the alternatives mutually exclusive but rather was designed to permit the imposition of either or both sanctions.” 487 So. 2d at 349 (emphasis in original). We disagree. The guideline clearly states that the appropriate sentence was community control or incarceration. Any change in that presumptive guideline must occur through appropriate legislative and court rule action, rather than by judicial construction.
Accordingly, we approve the instant case and the Fifth District’s decision in Hankey, and disapprove the Second District’s decision in Francis.
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (78 total)
-
Trotter v. State, 576 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1990)…of Appeal, recognizing Mestas, found that community control cannot serve as a substitute for probation and thereby extend a sentence beyond the guidelines range, as can probation, without departure reasons [*696] being given. In State v. VanKooten, 522 So. 2d 830 (Fia.1988), we found that a combined sentence of community control and incarceration represents a sentencing guidelines departure. This would not be true if community control were not the same as imprisonment. In guidelines sentences the first cell…
-
State v. Davis, 630 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1994)…guidelines, it appears somewhat peculiar to consider the combined sanctions to be a departure. Davis v. State, 617 So. 2d 1139, 1140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). I would uphold Davis’ sentence if it were not for the clear language of State v. Vankooten, 522 So. 2d 830 (Fla.1988), in which I did not participate.…1 / 2
-
State v. Bodine, 522 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 1988)
Previewing 3 of 78 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Francis v. State, 487 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Hankey v. State, 505 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- State v. Demas, 512 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- VanKOOTEN v. State, 512 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)