STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID EVERETT BINGHAM, 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.
The court held that because one of the two reasons given for the downward departure from the presumptive guidelines sentence was valid, the sentence is affirmed.
The state appealed the trial court's downward departure from the presumptive guidelines sentence for a defendant who pled nolo contendere to buying co…
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 Valid Reasons For Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, Acting Chief Judge.
The state appeals the trial court’s downward departure from the presumptive guidelines sentence. We find that one of the two reasons given for departure is valid and affirm the sentence.
David Bingham pled nolo contendere to a charge of buying cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school. Although the guidelines provided a range of between three and one-half to four and one-half years imprisonment, the trial court sentenced him to five years probation. The trial court gave as reasons for departing downward Bing-ham’s clean record and that under the circumstances of this case Bingham posed no danger to society.
The first reason for departure, the lack of prior record, is invalid. Sanders v. State, 510 So. 2d 296 (Fla.1987). The second reason given, that Bingham posed little or no threat or danger to society, has been upheld as a valid reason for departure. State v. Sachs, 526 So. 2d 48, 50 (Fla.1988). Because there was a valid reason for departure, we affirm the sentence of the trial court. See § 921.001(5), Fla. Stat. (1987); State v. Burch, 476 So. 2d 663 (Fla.1985).
Affirmed.
ALTENBERND, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F. (Ret.) J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Regan, 564 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…A.C.J., concurring specially). The fourth reason for departure— that defendant did not constitute a threat to society — is closely related to the first reason and is in these circumstances a valid reason for departure. See Sachs; State v. Bingham, 549 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). The crime for which defendant was convicted having been committed after the enactment of section 921.001(5), Florida Statutes (1987), it is not determinative that others of the trial court’s reasons for departure were invalid.…1 / 2
-
Simmons v. State, 554 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…We find merit only in Simmons’ second point on appeal. Simmons was given no notice and opportunity to object to the imposition of court costs, Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984), or to the conditions of his probation, Boatright v. State, 549 So. 2d 1173 (Fla.2d DCA 1989). Accordingly, we reverse the order placing Simmons on probation and remand this cause for resentencing with directions consistent herewith. Reversed and remanded. DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.…
-
State v. Bierer, 580 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. State v. Sachs, 526 So. 2d 48, 50 (Fla.1988); State v. Regan, 564 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); State v. Bingham, 549 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); State v. Forbes, 536 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Sachs, 526 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 1988)
- Sanders v. State, 510 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 1987)
- State v. Burch, 476 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 1985)