JAMES RILEY, 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 affirmed the conviction for possession of burglary tools but reversed and remanded for resentencing due to the trial court's failure to consider statutory criteria.
A juvenile was convicted of possession of burglary tools and sentenced with adult sanctions. The evidence showed he was the driver of a stolen car, wh…
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 Adult Sanctions For Juveniles cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
James Riley, a juvenile, appeals from his conviction of possession of burglary tools and a sentence which imposed adult sanctions pursuant to section 39.059(7)(c), Florida Statutes (Supp.1990). We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.
We hold that the record contains sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that appellant driver of the stolen automobile, and the codefendant, were in possession of the burglary tools which they had used that morning to steal the automobile. Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s conviction.
Appellant argues, and the state concedes, that the trial court committed reversible error when it failed to consider the criteria enumerated in section 39.059(7)(c), Florida Statutes (Supp.1990) and failed to provide written findings. Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s conviction, but reverse and remand the cause for resentencing in accordance with section 39.059(7)(c). As a result, appellant’s third point on appeal, which challenges trial counsel’s effectiveness at the sentencing, is moot.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED.
DELL, STONE and WARNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Borges v. Osceola Farms Co. & Nat'l Emp'rs Co., 651 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…t of all the relevant circumstances: physical impairment, age, industrial history, training, education, motivation, work experience, work record, and diligence. Edwards v. Caulfield, 560 So. 2d 364, 375 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Accord Gill v. USX Corp., 588 So. 2d 1035, 1037-38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (adequacy of [*175] work search is just one factor in determination of benefits; other factors include age, education, work history, etc.); GCC Beverage v. Simmons, 571 So. 2d 59, 60 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (adequacy of work…
-
Roll v. Inlet, 609 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…pra at 483. In determining the adequacy of a work search or whether claimant has voluntarily limited his income, the JCC should look at all existing circumstances. Paramount Poultry v. Mims, 472 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In Gill v. USX Corp., 588 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), this court held that one of the circumstances to be considered in evaluating a work search was employer and carrier’s failure to monitor and provide job-search assistance, and held that failure to consider such circumstances wou…1 / 2
-
Bell v. State, 598 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…R CURIAM. The trial court erred in sentencing this appellant by failing to comply with section 39.059(7)(c), Florida Statutes (1991). Specifically, the trial court must address each of the statutory criteria in a written order. See Riley v. State, 588 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Kohler v. State, 588 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Flowers v. State, 546 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). We remand for resentencing in accordance with the statute. We also note that the judgment indicates that appellant is b…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence