KEVIN BELL, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Statutory Limits cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In Bell v. State, 528 So. 2d 554, 555 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), the district court certified the following question of great public importance:
WHERE A TRIAL JUDGE FINDS THAT THE UNDERLYING REASONS FOR VIOLATION OF PROBATION CONSTITUTE MORE THAN A MINOR INFRACTION AND ARE SUFFICIENTLY EGREGIOUS, MAY HE DEPART FROM THE PRESUMPTIVE GUIDELINES RANGE AND IMPOSE AN APPROPRIATE SENTENCE WITHIN THE STATUTORY LIMIT EVEN THOUGH THE DEFENDANT HAS NOT BEEN “CONVICTED” OF THE CRIMES WHICH THE TRIAL JUDGE CONCLUDED CONSTITUTED A VIOLATION OF HIS PROBATION.
The same court certified essentially the same question regarding violation of community control in Lambert v. State, 517 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), which we answered in the negative. Lambert v. State, 545 So. 2d 838 (Fla.1989). The same reasoning applies here because an actual prior conviction is necessary to support a guidelines departure for a probation violation as well as for a violation of community control. We therefore answer the certified question in the negative, quash Bell, and direct a remand for resentencing within the guidelines.
It is so ordered.
EHRLICH, C.J., and McDONALD, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. OVERTON, J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (68 total)
-
Porter v. State, 564 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 1990)…or cruel, and cold, calculated, and premeditated); Amoros v. State, 531 So. 2d 1256, 1261 (Fla.1988); Garron v. State, 528 So. 2d 353, 361 (Fla.1988); Fead v. State, 512 So. 2d 176, 179 (Fla.1987), receded from, on other grounds, Pentecost v. State, 545 So. 2d 861, 863 n. 3 (Fla.1989); Irizarry v. State, 496 So. 2d 822, 825-26 (Fla.1986); Wilson v. State, 493 So. 2d 1019, 1023 (Fla. 1986); Ross v. State, 474 So. 2d 1170, 1174 (Fla.1985); Herzog v. State, 439 So. 2d 1372, 1381 (Fla.1983); Blair v. State, 406 S…
-
Trotter v. State, 576 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1990)…Ct. 2278, 101 L.Ed.2d 80 (1988). Trotter has made no such claim. Under Florida law, “[t]o show reversible error, a defendant must show that all peremptories had been exhausted and that an objectionable juror had to be accepted.” Pentecost v. State, 545 So. 2d 861, 863 n. 1 (Fla.1989). By this we mean the following. Where a defendant seeks reversal based on a claim that he was wrongfully forced to exhaust his peremptory challenges, he initially must identify a specific juror whom he otherwise would have struc…
-
Kearse v. State, 770 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 2000)…the juror possesses an impartial state of mind. See Bryant v. State, 656 So. 2d 426, 428 (Fla.1995). A trial court has great discretion when deciding whether to grant or deny a challenge for cause based on juror incompetency. See Pentecost v. State, 545 So. 2d 861 (Fla.1989). The decision to deny a challenge for cause will be upheld on appeal if there is support in the record for the decision. See Gore v. State, 706 So. 2d 1328, 1332 (Fla.1997), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 892, 119 S.Ct. 212, 142 L.Ed.2d 174 (1998…
Previewing 3 of 68 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lambert v. State, 545 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 1989)
- Lambert v. State, 517 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Keys v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Broward Cnty., 528 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
- Daizi v. State, 528 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)