STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CURTIS WILLIAMS, 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 held that a trial court must provide written reasons for a downward departure sentence when the state is not a party to the plea agreement.
Defendant pled guilty to obtaining property with a worthless check and grand theft, receiving concurrent sentences. The trial court did not provide wr…
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
PER CURIAM.
Defendant pled guilty to one count of obtaining property in return for a worthless check and to one count of grand theft, and the trial court sentenced him to four years’ imprisonment on each count to run concurrently. We reverse the sentence because the trial court failed to provide written reasons for the downward departure, which were required here because the state was not a party to the plea agreement.
The state argues that on remand, if defendant does not choose to withdraw his plea, he must be sentenced within the guidelines. Defendant argues that the trial court did not consider the sentencing guidelines scoresheet, that the scoresheet contains erroneous calculations, and that the trial court may have believed it was imposing a sentence within the guidelines, obviating the need for written reasons for a downward departure. It is not clear from this record whether the trial court did consider the scoresheet, and it does appear that the scoresheet contains erroneous calculations.
On remand the scoresheet must be clarified. Then, if the trial court believed it was imposing a sentence falling within the guidelines, the court can depart from the guidelines if it deems it proper to do so. State v. Vanhorn, 561 So. 2d 584 (Fla.1990). If the court knew it was departing from the guidelines, then defendant must be re-sentenced within the guidelines. Owens v. State, 598 So. 2d 64 (Fla.1992).
Reversed and remanded.
DELL, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Gitto, 731 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…vestigation has occurred. 826 S.W. 2d at 322. . See also State v. Kennedy, 698 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); State v. Johnson, 696 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); State v. Hon-iker, 675 So. 2d 681, 682 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); State v. Williams, 616 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).…
-
State v. Kennedy, 698 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…lea agreement, the agreement cannot serve as a basis for a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines. See State v. Herrick, 691 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); State v. Honiker, 675 So. 2d 681, 682 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); State v. Williams, 616 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). We also agree with the State that the record does not support the trial court’s downward departure sentence based on the need for alcohol treatment. In certain cases, intoxication can be a valid reason for a downward departure…
-
State v. Damien Hurley, 772 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…ed against him in the instant case. . See State v. Kennedy, 698 So. 2d 349, 351 (Fla. 4 th DCA 1997)(citing State v. Herrick, 691 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 5 th DCA 1997); State v. Honiker, 675 So. 2d 681, 682 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); and State v. Williams, 616 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 4 th DCA 1993)), receded from on other grounds by Welling v. State, 748 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 4 th dca 1999), rev. denied, 770 So. 2d 163 (Fla.2000); see also State v. Warner, 721 So. 2d 767, 769 n. 2 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (dicta) (citing Kennedy, su…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Vanhorn, 561 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1990)
- Owens v. State, 598 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 1992)