STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
MARK CARR, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1989-05-25
No. 72926
EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
544 So. 2d 192 Florida Supreme Court (1989) Caution
Cited by 2 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.


Holding

The court held that the sentence imposed was subject to conflicting interpretations and required resentencing in conformity with clarified sentencing options.


Facts & Procedural History

Carr was sentenced to forty years imprisonment, with thirty-two years suspended and twenty years probation. The district court upheld the sentence but…

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
McDONALD, Justice.

McDONALD, Justice.

We accepted jurisdiction to review Carr v. State, 528 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), because of conflict with Cassidy v. State, 464 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), and Alexander v. State, 422 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).

The issue in this case is the propriety of and interpretation of Carr’s sentence for armed robbery. The trial judge imposed a sentence of forty years’ imprisonment, suspended thirty-two years thereof, and placed Carr on probation for twenty years.* The district court upheld the sentence but deleted the twenty-year probation. Both the state and Carr urge that Carr should be resentenced because the intent of the trial judge’s sentence is subject to conflicting interpretations. We agree.

Subsequent to the trial judge’s sentence and the opinion of the district court, we decided Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1988), which delineates and clarifies the trial judge’s sentencing options. -We therefore quash the decision under review with instructions to the district court to vacate Carr's present sentence and remand to the trial judge to resentence Carr in conformity with the options available under Poore.

It is so ordered.

EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. *

The recommended guidelines sentence was seven to nine years. The statutory maximum was life imprisonment.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Moore v. State, 994 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
    …ng the preliminary (and principled) articulation and balancing of the alternatives by the court. The “bottom line,” the actual product of that balancing process, was clearly and concisely stated by the court. This is not a case, as in State v. Carr, 544 So. 2d 192 (Fla.1989), in which the terms of the actual sentence imposed are subject to conflicting interpretations. Affirmed.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw