FERNANDO BOOM, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Concurrent Sentences cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, Judge.
The appellant was convicted of trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, both carrying minimum mandatory sentences of fifteen years. Upon remand from a previous appeal, 538 So. 2d 476, the trial court resentenced the appellant to two consecutive fifteen-year minimum mandatory terms. The recommended guidelines range was five and one-half to seven years’ imprisonment. The appellant argues that under Branam v. State, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla.1990), his sentences must be vacated and concurrent minimum mandatory sentences imposed. We agree and reverse.
In Branam, the supreme court held that in cases, such as this, where statutory minimums preclude sentencing within the guidelines recommendation, the court must impose either concurrent or consecutive sentences to come as close to the guidelines recommendation as possible.
We therefore reverse the sentences and remand to the trial court for the imposition of concurrent minimum mandatory sentences.
Reversed and remanded.
RYDER, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 695 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…en those offenses arise out of the same criminal episode and involve the same contraband. See Frazier v. State, 630 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 639 So. 2d 978 (Fla.1994); Drake v. State, 614 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Boom v. State, 574 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Since the record shows that both the trafficking and the conspiracy in this instance arose out of the same criminal episode and involved the same contraband, the trial court erred in ordering the minimum mandatory sentences for t…
-
Harden v. State, 595 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…iminal Procedure, to correct an alleged illegal sentence. The sentence, which involved the stacking of mandatory minimum sentences, is inconsistent with the principle announced in Branam v. State, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla.1990). See also Boom v. State, 574 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Nonetheless, it appears to have been proper at the time it was imposed and, in fact, subsequently affirmed by this court in Harden v. State, 541 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). See Palmer v. State, 438 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1983). As i…
-
Fannin v. State, 751 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…e, 654 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (co-defendant of Fannin); Wilner v. Singletary, 647 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Zamora v. State, 584 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Hemandez-Reinoso v. State, 583 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Boom v. State, 574 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). The Fourth District, in Darrisaw v. State, 682 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), agreed with our interpretation of Branam. Based on these decisions, we conclude that the trial court in this case should have granted Fannin’s motion…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Branam v. State, 554 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 1990)
- Boom v. State, 538 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)