STEVEN PARMLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1991-12-11
No. 90-02516
SCHEB, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.
590 So. 2d 1016 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Steven Parmley appealed his guidelines departure sentence, challenging the trial court's reliance on multiple probation violations as a basis for departure, disputing time-served credits, and identifying scrivener's errors in the judgment. The court affirmed the departure sentence but remanded for proper computation of gain-time credit and correction of the scrivener's errors in the conviction descriptions.


Holding

The court affirmed that multiple probation violations can support a guidelines departure sentence, certified the question to the Florida Supreme Court for clarification on the applicability of prior precedent, and remanded for determination of gain-time credits and correction of the scrivener's errors in the judgment entries.


Headnotes

[1] Multiple probation violations may constitute a valid reason for a guidelines departure sentence.

[2] A defendant is entitled to credit for earned gain-time towards their sentence.

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“Adams permitted departure beyond the one-cell bump-up on this basis.”

Establishes the precedential basis for using probation violations as a departure reason.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Parmley was sentenced under Florida's sentencing guidelines with a departure from the presumptive sentence. The departure was based on multiple violat…

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.


Opinion of the Court
THREADGILL, Judge.

THREADGILL, Judge.

Steven Parmley appeals a guidelines departure sentence on the following grounds: that multiple probation violations is not a valid reason for departure, that time served was not properly credited, and that the judgment contained scriveners’ errors. We affirm Parmley’s sentence, but remand for computation of time served and correction of scriveners’ errors.

The appellant contends that the trial court erred in basing his departure sentence upon multiple violations of probation and community control and asks that we certify the question as we did in Williams v. State, 559 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Williams upheld the departure but asked the supreme court for clarification as to whether Ree v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla.1990) and Lambert v. State, 545 So. 2d 838 (Fla.1989), receded from Adams v. State, 490 So. 2d 53 (Fla.1986). Adams permitted departure beyond the one-cell bump-up on this basis. We therefore affirm the departure sentence and again certify the question certified in Williams.

The appellant also contends that he was deprived of full credit for time served because he was not credited with earned gain-time, to which he is entitled under State v. Green, 547 So. 2d 925 (Fla.1989). As the record on appeal contains no evidentiary findings on this issue, we remand for a determination as to the amount of gain-time due to the appellant under Green.

The appellant cites and the state concedes a number of scriveners’ errors in the description of the appellant’s convictions in case numbers 85-4297 and 87-15007. Therefore, we remand for the following corrections: 1) in case number 85-4297, the judgments entered on February 22, 1988, May 19,1988, September 8, 1988, February 9, 1989, November 20, 1989, and July 17, 1990, should be corrected to show a conviction for aggravated assault, a third-degree felony, in violation of section 784.021, Florida Statutes (1983); and 2) in case number 87-15007, the judgments entered on February 9, 1989, November 20, 1989, July 17, 1990, should be corrected to show a conviction for possession of cocaine, a third-degree felony, in violation of section 893.-13(l)(f), Florida Statutes (1987).

In conclusion, we affirm the appellant’s departure sentence, remand for a determination of credit for time served and for the correction of scrivener’s errors.

Affirmed.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Parmley v. State, 599 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 1992)
    …PER CURIAM. We review Parmley v. State, 590 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), in which the court certified as a question of great public importance the same question it had certified in Williams v. State, 559 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florid…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw