JOSE MEDINA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1991-12-24
No. 91-1389
Before COPE, LEVY and GERSTEN, JJ.
590 So. 2d 1094 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1991)

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant to a term outside the correct sentencing guidelines range agreed upon in a plea agreement.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant entered a plea agreement for a guidelines sentence on reduced counts in exchange for substantial assistance, but the agreement erroneously l…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Jose Medina, appeals his sentence for multiple counts of conspiracy and trafficking in cannabis, and conspiracy and trafficking in cocaine. We reverse.

Appellant entered into a plea agreement providing a guidelines sentence on a reduced number of counts in exchange for substantial assistance to the State. The plea agreement erroneously listed the guidelines sentence as “7-9 years.”

At the sentencing hearing, the State advised the court that appellant had complied with the terms of the plea agreement. The State also pointed out that the recommended guidelines sentence for appellant was 5V2-7 years. Nevertheless, the court sentenced appellant to nine years.

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in failing to sentence appellant to the correct guidelines range. The State concedes error. In sentencing appellant, the trial court stated:

[H]e got the benefit of the bargain.”

In fact, the benefit of appellant’s bargain was to receive the guidelines sentence for the charges to which he pleaded. Accordingly, we find error and remand this cause for resentencing pursuant to the correct sentencing guidelines. See Sellers v. State, 578 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA), decision approved, 586 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1991).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw