ROGER BRANAM, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 affirmed the defendant's convictions but reversed the downward departure sentence, remanding for resentencing within the guidelines.
The defendant was convicted of sexual battery, attempted sexual battery, and false imprisonment. The trial court departed downward from the recommende…
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 Attempted Sexual Battery cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Judge.
Roger Branam appeals from his judgment and sentence for sexual battery, attempted sexual battery, and false imprisonment. The state cross-appeals from the downward departure sentence imposed upon Branam. We affirm Branam’s convictions but remand for resentencing.
Branam was charged by information with two counts of sexual battery upon a person twelve years of age or older, causing her to submit by threatening serious personal injury with a deadly weapon or with physical force, and with kidnapping. A jury found Branam guilty of the lesser included offenses of sexual battery with threats of force or violence, attempted sexual battery, and false imprisonment.
Branam’s scoresheet reflected a recommended sentence of life. However, the trial court sentenced Branam to a term of five years in prison for each offense to run concurrently and listed fifteen reasons for departing downward from the guidelines.
We have considered Branam’s arguments on appeal and find them meritless. We agree, however, with the state’s argument that none of the trial court’s reasons for departure is valid. Therefore, we remand for resentencing within the guidelines. In so doing, we note that the presumptive guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum for the offenses for which Bra-nam was convicted. Thus, the trial court must resentence Branam to the maximum term provided by the applicable statutes.
Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded.
LEHAN, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Branam v. State, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 1990)…ounts, to run concurrently, and listed reasons for this downward departure. The reasons given for the departure were subsequently found to be invalid, and the case was remanded for resentenc-ing within the guidelines recommendation. Branam v. State, 526 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 534 So. 2d 398 (Fla.1988). At the resentencing hearing, the judge sentenced the petitioner to the statutory maximum terms of thirty years, five years, and five years, to be served consecutively. On appeal, the court re…
-
Branam v. State, 540 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…es to run concurrently, and listed reasons for departing downward from the recommended guidelines range. This court previously found none of the reasons for departure valid and remanded “for resentencing within the guidelines.” See Branam v. State, 526 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). This court also noted that the presumptive guidelines sentence exceeded the statutory maximum for the of [*159] fenses and that Branam must be resen-tenced to the maximum term provided by the applicable statutes. On remand, the…