STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
SHELBY THOMPSON, 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 affirmed the conviction but reversed and remanded for resentencing because the trial court failed to contemporaneously provide written reasons for a downward departure sentence, though the departure itself was legally justified under Barbera.
A trial court must contemporaneously provide written reasons for a downward departure from sentencing guidelines, even if the departure is otherwise legally justified.
[1] A trial court must contemporaneously provide written reasons for a downward departure from sentencing guidelines, and failure to do so constitutes reversible error even i…
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 intelligenceAppellee pleaded guilty to burglary with battery and armed robbery and received a six-year concurrent sentence below the sentencing guidelines based o…
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 Contemporaneous Written Reasons cases and more on FLexlaw
POLEN, Judge.
Appellee entered a plea of guilty to charges of burglary with a battery and strong armed robbery and was sentenced to six years incarceration on both counts to run concurrently. The issue raised on appeal is the trial court’s imposition of a sentence below the sentencing guidelines based on Barbera v. State, 505 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1987).
We affirm the trial court’s reliance on Barbera and the record supporting a downward departure based on appel-lee’s intoxication at the time of commission of the offense. See Herrin v. State, 568 So. 2d 920 (Fla.1990); State v. Joseph, 543 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). However, although the trial court did subsequently commit its oral pronouncements to writing, we find reversible error in the trial court’s failure to contemporaneously provide written reasons for the departure sentence as required by Ree v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla.1990). Given the facts of the case, upon remand for resentencing, the trial court is not precluded by Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla.1990) from contemporaneously imposing the same departure sentence previously but untimely committed to writing by the court. See Owens v. State, 563 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). We affirm the conviction but reverse and remand for resentencing in accordance with this opinion.
ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wilmer Ray Adkinson v. State, 590 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…a.1990), this court found Pope inapplicable to situations where valid reasons existed at the point of remand, and the only problem was the trial court’s failure to timely issue the written reasons at the sentencing hearing. Accord State v. Thompson, 570 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). See also State v. Williams, 576 So. 2d 281 (Fla.1991), wherein the Supreme Court cited Owens as authority for the proposition that Pope did not apply to re-sentencing under Ree, in that it was directed only to situations where n…
Authorities Cited
- Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 1990)
- REE v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla. 1990)
- Barbera v. State, 505 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1987)
- Herrin v. State, 568 So. 2d 920 (Fla. 1990)
- State v. Joseph, 543 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
- Owens v. State, 563 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)