RENE A. ROGER, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed defendant's sentences imposed upon community control revocation because they violated sentencing guidelines and exceeded statutory maximums for the offenses.
Upon revocation of community control, a trial court may depart only one cell from the presumptive sentencing guidelines range and cannot exceed statutory maximum sentences for the underlying offenses.
[1] Upon revocation of community control, a trial court may depart only one cell from the presumptive sentencing guidelines range and cannot impose sentences exceeding the st…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendant Rene A. Roger was sentenced to twenty-five years for armed burglary, two fifteen-year sentences for second-degree grand theft, and fifteen y…
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 Second Degree Grand Theft cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the defendant Rene A. Roger from (1) a twenty-five year sentence for armed burglary, (2) two fifteen-year sentences for two counts of second-degree grand theft, and (3) a fifteen-year sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon — all sentences to run concurrently. These sentences were imposed following the trial court’s revocation of the defendant’s community control on all of the above offenses. We reverse.
The trial court, upon revocation of the defendant’s community control, was only entitled to depart one cell from the presumptive sentencing guidelines range of five and one-half years to seven years imprisonment, Franklin v. State, 545 So. 2d 851 (Fla.1989); none of the sentences imposed herein conforms to this standard. Moreover, the trial court could not, in any event, exceed the statutory maximum sentence of five-years imprisonment for second-degree grand theft, § 812.014(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1986); § 775.082(3)(d), Fla. Stat. (1987); see Sumpter v. State, 531 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); the fifteen-year sentences imposed on the two counts of second-degree grand theft do not conform to this standard.
The sentences under review are, accordingly, reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing in accord with the above standards.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Franklin v. State, 545 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 1989)
- Lonny Lawrence Sumpter v. State, 531 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Maio v. State, 531 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)