DIANNE ELIZABETH JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
The court held that a departure sentence must be based on proper written reasons.
Appellant was sentenced after pleading guilty to manslaughter and nolo contendere to grand theft. The trial court departed from sentencing guidelines,…
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
SCHOONOVER, Judge.
The appellant, Dianne Elizabeth Jones, challenges a departure sentence imposed upon her after she pled guilty to a charge of manslaughter by intoxication and nolo contendere to a charge of second degree grand theft. We reverse.
At the appellant’s original sentencing hearing, the trial court departed from the guidelines in imposing sentence upon the appellant. The court gave oral reasons for departing, but did not enter a proper written order. Upon appeal, the state conceded that the court erred and we reversed for resentencing. Jones v. State, 533 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).
Upon remand, the trial court entered another departure sentence giving oral reasons for departure without entering the proper written order. The appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from this sentence. The state again concedes that the trial court erred, and we again reverse and remand for resentencing. We remind the trial court that any departure from the guidelines must be based upon proper reasons and must be in writing.
Reversed and remanded.
CAMPBELL, C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hanor v. The Honorable Harry G. Hinckley, Jr., 584 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…, temporary alimony and attorney’s fees, to a master over the objection of Hanor. Reference under those circumstances is prohibited by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(c). Taylor v. Taylor, 569 So. 2d 1389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Murphy v. Murphy, 558 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Accordingly, the writ shall issue. Pursuant thereto, the trial court shall vacate the order of reference and proceed in conformity with this opinion. DELL and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.…
-
Lunger v. The Honorable Harry G. Hinckley, Jr., 572 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…er as a named respondent. The respondent concedes error. We grant the petition for writ of mandamus and prohibition and quash the order of the trial court on the authority of Taylor v. Taylor, 569 So. 2d 1389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Murphy v. Murphy, 558 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). See Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(c). ANSTEAD, LETTS and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.…
-
Joara Freight Lines, Inc. v. Perez, 160 So. 3d 114 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)…. Garcia, 958 So. 2d 947, 949 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Pesut v. Miller, 773 So. 2d 1185, 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Hanor v. Hinckley, 584 So. 2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Taylor v. Taylor, 569 So. 2d 1389, 1389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Murphy v. Murphy, 558 So. 2d 532, 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Miller v. Lifshutz, 558 So. 2d 195, 196 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Bathurst v. Tuner, 533 So. 2d 939, 941 (Fla. 3d DCA [*117] 1988). Moreover, a trial court cannot appoint a special master on its own motion. See Pesut, 773 So. 2d…
Authorities Cited
- Jones v. State, 533 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)