JOEY MORVIANI, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1993-02-24
No. 92-00318
FRANK, A.C.J., and HALL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
613 So. 2d 614 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1993) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Joey Morviani appeals a sentence imposed after multiple violations of probation. We affirm the sentence on the basis of Manuel v. State, 582 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). In Manuel we held that “bumping” a guideline sentence one cell for violation of probation, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(14), necessarily raises the “permitted range” by one cell also. Contrary to the position taken by Morviani in this appeal, we do not believe that Manuel is inconsistent with Williams v. State, 594 So. 2d 273 (Fla.1992).

Affirmed.

FRANK, A.C.J., and HALL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Allen v. State, 662 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
    …resheet, the trial judge was permitted to bump the recommendation two cells upward, based on appellant’s separate, successive violations of his probation and community control. See Williams v. State, 594 So. 2d 273 (Fla.1992), and Morviani v. State, 613 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (“bumping” a guideline sentence one cell for violation of probation, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(14), necessarily raises the “permitted range” by one cell also). However, pursuant to Felty v. State, 63…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw