EDDIE DENSON, 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.
Eddie Denson appealed his convictions and sentence for selling and possessing cocaine. The court affirmed his convictions but vacated and remanded his sentence for selling cocaine because the trial court imposed a 30-month prison term that departed from the sentencing guidelines without providing written justification.
The court affirmed Denson's convictions but vacated his sentence for selling cocaine because the trial court departed from the sentencing guidelines by imposing a 30-month sentence without providing written justification. On remand, the trial court may reconsider whether departure is appropriate and, if so, must provide valid reasons for the departure.
[1] A trial court errs in departing from sentencing guidelines without contemporaneous written reasons justifying the departure.
[2] A trial court, upon finding it imposed a departure sentence without valid reasons, may reconsider departure on remand if the record does not indicate the court was aware…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“This score results in a recommended range and a permitted range of any nonstate prison sanction. Section 921.001 of the Florida Statutes (1989) provides that 'any nonstate prison sanction' means a term of incarceration not to exceed 22 months.”
Establishes that the guideline score of 73 points permitted only up to 22 months incarceration, making the 30-month sentence a departure from guidelines.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA jury found Denson guilty of selling cocaine and possessing cocaine. The trial court sentenced him to 30 months incarceration for selling cocaine and…
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
[*654] DIAMANTIS, Judge.
Appellant Eddie Denson appeals his convictions and sentence which were entered by the trial court after a jury found him guilty of selling cocaine1 and possessing cocaine.2 We affirm his judgment of guilt because we do not find any merit in appellant’s argument directed to his convictions, but we vacate his sentence for the offense of selling cocaine.
The trial court sentenced appellant to 30 months incarceration for the offense of selling cocaine and a consecutive term of five years probation for the offense of possession of cocaine. In sentencing appellant, the trial court utilized guidelines scoresheet 7 which is applicable to drug offenses. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.988(g)(category 7). The trial court assessed 73 points on appellant’s scoresheet. This score results in a recommended range and a permitted range of any nonstate prison sanction. Section 921.001 of the Florida Statutes (1989) provides that “any nonstate prison sanction” means a term of incarceration not to exceed 22 months. Thus, in sentencing appellant to 30 months incarceration the trial court departed from the sentencing guidelines. Because the trial court failed to provide any contemporaneous written reasons justifying departure, the trial court erred in departing. Ellison v. State, 545 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). However, because the record does not indicate that the trial court realized that it was imposing a departure sentence, on remand the trial court is permitted to consider whether departure is appropriate and, if so, to set forth valid reasons for departure. State v. Betancourt, 552 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1989).
Judgment AFFIRMED; sentence REVERSED and REMANDED.
COBB and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . § 893.13(1)(a)1, Fla.Stat. (1989).
. § 893.13(1)(f), Fla.Stat. (1989).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Betancourt, 552 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1989)
- Ellison v. State, 545 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)