MANUEL RICARDO VALDES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1988-07-07
No. 87-1052
ERVIN and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur., BOOTH, J., specially concurs.
528 So. 2d 94 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1988) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.

Synopsis

Valdes appealed two concurrent 25-year sentences for cocaine trafficking and conspiracy, arguing that departure sentences from guidelines required written reasons even when negotiated as part of a plea agreement. The court affirmed, holding that plea bargain sentences constitute valid reasons for departure from sentencing guidelines.


Holding

The court affirmed the sentences, holding that plea bargain sentences are generally considered valid reasons for departure from sentencing guidelines, and therefore written departure reasons are not required when sentences result from plea agreements.


Headnotes

[1] A plea bargain sentence is generally considered a valid reason for departure from sentencing guidelines.

[2] A trial court's failure to assign written reasons for a departure sentence is not grounds for vacating the sentence when the departure is the product of a plea negotiatio…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“plea bargain sentences are generally considered valid reasons for departure”

The court's holding that plea agreements satisfy the requirement for departure reasons in sentencing

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Valdes was convicted of trafficking in cocaine in an amount exceeding 400 grams and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. He received two concurrent 25-ye…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant contests the imposition of two 25-year-concurrent sentences for the offenses of trafficking and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine in an amount more than 400 grams. He contends that although the departure sentences imposed were the product of negotiation, because the trial court failed to assign written reasons for the departure,1 the sentences must be vacated and the cause remanded for resentencing. We affirm, following the rule that plea bargain sentences are generally considered valid reasons for departure. See Denmark v. State, 519 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), review pending, Case No. 71,744 (Fla.); Quarterman v. State, 506 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

In Denmark v. State, while affirming, we observed that there was certain language in Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501, 503 (Fla.1986), suggesting that a plea agreement for a defendant to be sentenced outside the guidelines may not constitute a valid reason to depart from the recommended range. Accordingly, we certified the question to the Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance. Identical to the position taken in Denmark, we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance:

IN LIGHT OF WILLIAMS V. STATS, 500 So. 2d 501 (Fla.1986), MAY A TRIAL JUDGE EXCEED THE RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES SENTENCE BASED UPON A LEGITIMATE AND UNCOERCED CONDITION OF A PLEA BARGAIN?

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur. BOOTH, J., specially concurs.

. The guideline range for appellant’s primary offenses was five-and-one-half to seven years, a range less than the mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen provided for appellant’s offenses. See § 893.135(1)(b)(3), Fla.Stat. The mandatory sentence of course supplants the recommended sentence, see Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701 d.9., and therefore, if the mandatory sentence had been exacted, no departure reasons were required to be given. Because, however, the sentences imposed exceeded the mandatory minimum, a departure reason should normally be given unless — as held in the case law authority cited infra — the sentence is the result of a plea bargain.

Concurrence
BOOTH, Judge,

BOOTH, Judge,

specially concurring.

I would affirm the judgment and sentences below.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Yukanovitz v. State, 547 So. 2d 722 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
    …ence.1 For, even if it was, the sentence imposed was precisely that which was agreed upon. Such sentences generally do not require any other reason for departure from the recommended range. White v. State, 531 So. 2d 711 (Fla.1988); Valdes v. State, 528 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Denmark v. State, 519 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), review denied 529 So. 2d 693 (Fla.1988). AFFIRMED. BARFIELD and MINER, JJ., concur. . Appellant claims that the imposition of both community control and incarceration is vi…
  • Craigus Johnson v. State, 557 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
    …PER CURIAM. Judgment and sentence affirmed. See Yukanovitz v. State, 547 So. 2d 722 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Valdes v. State, 528 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Imposition of costs reversed. See Wood v. State, 544 So. 2d 1004 (Fla.1989). BOOTH, THOMPSON and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw