CLAYTON FERGUSON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Clayton Ferguson appeals a 15-year sentence imposed after probation revocation for worthless check charges, arguing the sentence exceeded sentencing guidelines without adequate written justification. The Florida appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial court's reasons for departing from the guidelines were stated only as cryptic, vague notations rather than coherent written findings.
A trial court's fragmentary and cryptic notes on a sentencing scoresheet fail to provide adequate reasons—valid or invalid—for departing from sentencing guidelines. Written reasons for guideline departures must be articulated in a coherent fashion, not through vague and ambiguous references, and must permit appellate review.
[1] A trial court's written reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines must be articulated in a coherent fashion and cannot consist of cryptic notes with vague and ambi…
[2] Fragmentary notes on a sentencing scoresheet are insufficient to set out valid or invalid reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines.
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“we believe it is elementary that the reasons so stated must be articulated in a coherent fashion and cannot, as here, consist of cryptic notes with vague and ambiguous references”
Establishes the court's standard that sentencing reasons must be coherent and specific, not cryptic or ambiguous
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFerguson was originally placed on five years probation after pleading guilty to felony and misdemeanor worthless check charges. His probation was revo…
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 Written Reasons For Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the defendant Clayton Ferguson from a sentence exceeding the sentencing guidelines range which was imposed after the defendant’s probation was revoked. The defendant Clayton Ferguson was originally placed on five years probation after entering a guilty plea to a series of felony and misdemeanor worthless check charges. Subsequently, his probation was revoked after a hearing on the grounds that he (1) failed to report to the probation intake office, and (2) shoplifted a VCR from a Sears store five and one-half months after being placed on probation.
The trial court thereupon sentenced the defendant to fifteen years imprisonment— thereby exceeding the sentencing guidelines range of two and one-half to four and one-half years, which includes the permissible probation revocation one-cell departure without written reasons as provided by Fla. R.Crim.P. 8.701(d)(14).
The written reasons given by the trial court for departing from the sentencing guidelines consisted of the following cryptic notations to the sentencing scoresheet:
“Offenses Escalating See order attached. Heightened Degree of Offense. New offense immediate after Prob. Violation immediate after Prob.”
[There is no attached order to the sentencing scoresheet as stated above]. Although it is permissible for a trial court to set out on the sentencing scoresheet its reasons for departing from the sentencing guidelines, see Torres-Arboledo v. State, 524 So. 2d 403 (Fla.1988); Johnson v. State, 524 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Velazquez-Velazquez v. State, 523 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), we believe it is elementary that the reasons so stated must be articulated in a coherent fashion and cannot, as here, consist of cryptic notes with vague and ambiguous references. Cf. State v. Jackson, 478 So. 2d 1054, 1056 (Fla.1985), receded from on other grounds, Wilkerson v. State, 513 So. 2d 664 (Fla.1987); Hipp v. State, 509 So. 2d 1208, 1212 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).
See generally Boynton v. State, 473 So. 2d 703, 707 (Fla. 4th DCA) (stressing importance of clear, concisely written findings to the proper development of law by appellate courts), approved, 478 So. 2d 351 (Fla.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1029, 106 S.Ct. 1232, 89 L.Ed.2d 341 (1986).
This being so, we hold that the trial court’s fragmentary notes on the sentencing score-sheet fail to set out any reasons—valid or invalid—for departing from the sentencing guidelines.1 A reversal and remand is, accordingly, in order to permit the trial court to enter a more detailed order justifying the sentencing guidelines departure herein. Viera v. State, 490 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
The sentence under review is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions (1) to enter a more detailed order setting out the reasons for departing from the sentencing guidelines, or (2) to impose a sentence within the sentencing guidelines.
Reversed and remanded.
. In the prior opinion in this case, filed on July 19, 1988, we reached the merits of the reasons for departure allegedly represented by the notations on the scoresheet; however, upon further reflection, we believe it was error to do so because it required us to read too much—as the state continues to do on rehearing—into the fragmentary scoresheet notations which are wholly inadequate to state any reasons, valid or invalid, for departure in this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lattimore v. State, 571 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…, 55 (Fla.1988); and “short time after being sentenced” is not, in our view, a sufficiently articulated reason for a sentencing guidelines departure as it is entirely too vague. Davis v. State, 517 So. 2d 670, 672 n. 1 (Fla.1987); Ferguson v. State, 537 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Accordingly, the sentences imposed in this case cannot stand. The final judgments of conviction under review are affirmed. The sentences under review are reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to…
-
Isabelle Rodriguez v. State, 645 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…ture sentence was based on the new criminal offense of conspiracy to commit murder. This notation was sufficient to satisfy the writing requirement for a departure sentence. See Torres-Arboledo v. State, 524 So. 2d 403 (Fla.1988); Ferguson v. State, 537 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Velazguez-Velazguez v. State, 523 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Second, defendant argues that her sentence cannot stand because the trial judge gave an invalid reason for the two cell departure. Specifically, defendant contends…
-
Robinson v. State, 541 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…PER CURIAM. The state having conceded error in the sentencing, the sentence be and the same is hereby set aside and the matter returned to the trial court for clarification of the sentence. See Ferguson v. State, 537 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); see and compare Powell v. State, 515 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- State v. Jackson, 478 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1985)
- Torres-Arboledo v. State, 524 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 1988)
- Boynton v. State, 473 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- State v. Boynton, 478 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1985)
- Ofarril v. United States, 475 U.S. 1029 (U.S. 1986)
- Barcena v. Washington, 475 U.S. 1029 (U.S. 1986)
- Wilkerson v. State, 513 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 1987)
- Hipp v. State, 509 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Viera v. State, 490 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Velazguez-Velazguez v. State, 523 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)