AARON HEARON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Hearon appeals his sentence for unlawful purchase of a controlled substance, arguing the trial court improperly combined incarceration, community control, and probation. The appellate court agrees, holding that when sentencing guidelines specify incarceration or community control as alternatives, they are mutually exclusive and cannot be imposed together without written reasons for departure.
When sentencing guidelines specify incarceration or community control as alternatives, those alternatives are mutually exclusive. Imposing both constitutes a departure from the guidelines and requires proper written reasons for the departure. Here, no written reasons were provided, making the sentence invalid.
[1] When sentencing guidelines direct community control or incarceration as alternatives, the imposition of both constitutes a departure from the guidelines.
[2] A departure from sentencing guidelines requires proper written reasons for the departure.
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“when the applicable sentencing guidelines bracket directs community control or incarceration, the imposition of both represents a departure from the sentencing guidelines and thus requires proper written reasons for the departure.”
Establishes the core rule that incarceration and community control cannot be combined without written departure reasons when guidelines present them as alternatives.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHearon pled guilty to violation of probation and unlawful purchase of a controlled substance. He received a sentence of 364 days imprisonment followed…
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 Sentencing Guidelines Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
W. SHARP, Judge.
Hearon appeals from his judgment and sentence for unlawful purchase of a controlled substance. He argues that the trial court erred in sentencing him to a combination of incarceration, community control and probation. We agree and reverse his sentence.
Hearon pled guilty to violation of probation, and was sentenced to 364 days imprisonment followed by 20 months community control, followed by 1 year probation. His recommended sentence was 2½ to 3½ years incarceration and his permitted sentence was community control or 1 to 4½ years imprisonment.
In State v. VanKooten, 522 So. 2d 830 (Fla.1988), the Florida Supreme Court held that when the applicable sentencing guidelines bracket directs community control or incarceration, the imposition of both represents a departure from the sentencing guidelines and thus requires proper written reasons for the departure. The court rejected the argument that the alternatives were designed to permit the imposition of either or both sanctions. It held alternatives were mutually exclusive. The court has recently reaffirmed its opinion in VanKooten that where the sentencing guidelines specify incarceration or community control, the alternatives are mutually exclusive. Felty v. State, 630 So. 2d 1092 (Fla.1994); State v. Davis, 630 So. 2d 1059 (Fla.1994).
In this case, Hearon’s score of 88 points (with the bump-up for violation of community control) resulted in a recommended range of 2½ to 3½ years incarceration and a permitted range of community control or 1 to 4½ years incarceration. Thus the imposition of community control and jail time constitutes a departure sentence, requiring written reasons for departure. No written reasons were provided.
Accordingly, we quash the sentence and remand this cause for resentencing pursuant to the guidelines. Felty; Dams; VanKooten. See also Hammond v. State, 626 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (where the recommended range was 3 to 7 years and the permitted range was community control or 1 to 12 years incarceration, the defendant’s sentence of 364 days incarceration followed by 2 years community control followed by 12 years probation exceeded the guidelines range since it consisted of incarceration and community control).
Conviction AFFIRMED; sentence REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.
GRIFFIN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Davis, 630 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1994)
- State v. VanKOOTEN, 522 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 1988)
- State v. Bodine, 522 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 1988)
- Felty v. State, 630 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 1994)
- Hammond v. State, 626 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)