JAMES KNIGHT, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1995-06-23
No. 94-00441
DANAHY, A.C.J., and WHATLEY, J., concur.
656 So. 2d 593 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1995) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that while the trial court made adequate findings to support adult sanctions, the written order failed to articulate specific individualized findings for each criterion as required by statute.


Facts & Procedural History

A juvenile was convicted of attempted murder with a firearm and grand theft of a motor vehicle. The trial court imposed adult sanctions.…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PARKER, Judge.

PARKER, Judge.

James Knight, a juvenile, appeals his judgments and sentences for attempted murder with a firearm and grand theft of a motor vehicle. We affirm the judgments. We reverse the sentences for the trial court’s failure to provide adequate written findings to justify imposing adult sanctions.

Although the transcript from the trial court reflects that the trial court made adequate findings to support adult sanctions, the trial court’s written order of findings to support adult sanctions does not articulate specific individualized findings for each criterion. Instead, the order is in a checklist format whereby each criterion is listed with a check mark placed next to it. According to Troutman v. State, 630 So. 2d 528 (Fla.1993), the written order does not satisfy the statutory requirements. Therefore, we are compelled to reverse the sentences and remand for entry of an order which satisfies the statutory requirements. On remand, the trial court may again impose adult sanctions provided that it follows the statutory requirements. See Menchaca v. State, 636 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).

The judgments are affirmed. The sentences are reversed and remanded for resentencing.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and WHATLEY, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Stuberfield v. State, 690 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
    …of conditions as they were at the time of the former hearing.4 . See, e.g., Jones v. State, 657 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Pearson v. State, 657 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Walker v. State, 656 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Knight v. State, 656 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Philmore v. State, 656 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Wood v. State, 655 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Gammage v. State, 655 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Crain v. State, 653 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Satalino v. State…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw