TIMOTHY POUGH, 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.
A trial court must individually evaluate each statutory criterion before imposing adult sanctions on a juvenile, and mere conclusory language is insufficient.
Timothy Pough was sentenced to adult sanctions without the trial court making individualized findings on the statutory factors. The order contained a …
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 Adult Sanctions For Juveniles cases and more on FLexlaw
RYDER, Acting Chief Judge.
Timothy Pough attacks the sentence of adult sanctions imposed by the trial court without its individualized evaluation of the factors enumerated in section 39.059(7)(c), Florida Statutes (1991). The order on appeal contained a marked checklist promulgated from the six criteria specified in the statute. The judge made no oral findings of the criteria at the sentencing hearing. The state concedes error. [A] trial court must consider each of the criteria of section 39.059(7)(c) before determining the suitability of adult sanctions. In so doing, the trial court must give an individualized evaluation of how a particular juvenile fits within the criteria. Mere conclusory language that tracks the statutory criteria is insufficient.
Troutman v. State, 630 So. 2d 528, 531 (Fla.1993).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court’s consideration of the reasons justifying adult sanctions and resentencing. We otherwise affirm.
PATTERSON and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Troutman v. State, 630 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 1993)
- Edler v. State, 630 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 1993)