STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
ARTHUR LEW DISBROW, JR., 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.
Florida appealed a back-end split sentence imposed on Disbrow for probation violations, arguing the sentencing scheme was illegal and constituted an unauthorized downward departure without written reasons. The appellate court agreed, vacated the sentence, and certified a question to the Florida Supreme Court regarding whether reverse split sentences constitute downward departures requiring written justification.
A back-end split sentence is nothing more than a straight probationary sentence with the threat of incarceration for violations, and therefore constitutes a downward departure under the sentencing guidelines that requires written justification. The sentence was improper because no written reasons were provided.
[1] A "back end split sentence" is considered a downward departure from sentencing guidelines.
[2] A downward departure sentence requires written reasons to be legally valid.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“a back end split sentence was nothing more than a straight probationary sentence with the threat of incarceration included if there was a violation of probation (or as here, community control)”
Establishes the court's characterization of back-end split sentences as downward departures
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn June 16, 1988, Disbrow was placed on probation in two burglary cases with five-year and fifteen-year probationary periods. He later violated probat…
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
W. SHARP, Judge.
The State timely appeals a back end split sentence imposed on Disbrow after he violated probation and was placed on community control. It argues the sentencing scheme is illegal,1 and that it constitutes a downward departure without written reasons.2 We agree.
On June 16, 1988, Disbrow was placed on probation in two cases: case no. 87-5227-CFA, burglary of a structure (violation of section 810.02); and ease no. 87-5228-CFA, burglary of a dwelling (violation of section 810.02). The probationary periods were for five years and fifteen years respectively. Thereafter Disbrow violated his probation by committing the offense of loitering and prowling. He pled guilty, and the court revoked his probation in both cases.
On September 21,1992, judgment and sentence were entered in the two cases. In case no. 87-5228 CFA, Disbrow was sentenced to two years community control coupled with numerous conditions, and then thirteen years in the DOC. If Disbrow complies with these conditions, the thirteen-year DOC portion will be modified and eliminated. In case no. 87-5227-CFA, Disbrow received five years in the DOC, consecutive to the DOC portion of case no. 87-5228-CFA. On that sentence, the court recommended a back end of a split sentence. Thus, Disbrow was released to community control.
We recently dealt with this issue in State v. Carder, 625 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). There, Carder pled guilty to felony retail theft and received a back end split sentence. We held that a back end split sentence was nothing more than a straight probationary sentence with the threat of incarceration included if there was a violation of probation (or as here, community control). As such, under Rule 3.701(d)(ll), it is a downward departure sentence, requiring written reasons, which in this case are missing.
We again certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court:
IS A REVERSE SPLIT SENTENCE A DOWNWARD DEPARTURE FROM THE GUIDELINES WHICH REQUIRES WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION?
SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED for resentencing.
GOSHORN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1988); Ferguson v. State, 594 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).
. Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla.1990).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Disbrow v. State, 642 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 1994)…GRIMES, Chief Justice. We review State v. Disbrow, 626 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), in which the court certified the following as a question of great public importance: IS A REVERSE SPLIT SENTENCE A DOWNWARD DEPARTURE FROM THE GUIDELINES WHICH REQUIRES WRITTEN JUSTIFICATIONS? Id. at 1124. We have jurisdiction…
-
State v. Guilford, 633 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…., concurs. GOSHORN, J., concurs specially, with opinion. . All of these cases are from Brevard county and Circuit Judge John Dean Moxley imposed each of the sentences. This court has previously dealt with back-end sentences. See State v. Disbrow, 626 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); State v. Carder, 625 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). . §§ 812.13(1) & 812.13(2)(c), Fla.Stat. (1991). . Count I, § 893.135(l)(b)l, Fla.Stat.; Count II, §§ 893.135(4) & 893.135(1)0)2, Fla.Stat. (1991). . Counts I and II, § 893…
-
State v. Williams, 652 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…s imposed upon the appellant without contemporaneous written reasons for the downward departure, and we remand for sentencing within the guidelines. § 948.01(11), Fla.Stat. (1991); Bell v. State, 651 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); State v. Disbrow, 626 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), approved, 642 So. 2d 740 (Fla.1994). SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED. HARRIS, C.J., and GRIFFIN, J., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1988)
- Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 1990)
- Richard A. Bolt, M.D. v. Smith, 594 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)
- State v. Carder, 625 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)