STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
LINTALLIFERRO CHANDLER, 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 appeals a downward departure sentence imposed on Chandler. The trial court sentenced him to 36 months imprisonment plus 24 months probation, which constituted a downward departure from the guidelines range of 50-84 months. The appellate court affirmed, finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in justifying the departure based on the unsophisticated nature of the offense and the defendant's remorse.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a downward departure sentence. The court's citation of the unsophisticated nature of the offense and the defendant's remorse constituted valid reasons for departure under Florida Statutes section 921.0016(4)(c), and the appellate court must uphold the sentence if any single factor justifies departure regardless of whether other factors are questionable.
[1] A downward departure sentence is permissible if supported by at least one reasonably justified factor established by a preponderance of the evidence.
[2] An appellate court must affirm a downward departure sentence if any single factor justifies the departure, even if other factors do not.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The trial court is not authorized to depart downward from the recommended guidelines state prison sentence without written reasons.”
Establishes the requirement that departure sentences must be supported by written reasons under Florida Statutes section 921.0016(l)(b).
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceChandler received a sentencing scoresheet showing 95.2 total sentence points, placing his guidelines sentencing range at 50 to 84 months in state pris…
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.
The state appeals the downward departure sentence given the defendant by the trial court below and raises two issues. Because the trial court did not abuse its discretion by imposing a downward departure based on one of the three reasons given, we are obliged to affirm.
The court imposed a sentence of 36 months’ imprisonment to be followed by two years of probation. The order states that the court did not find this to be a departure sentence because when the prison time is added to the number of months on probation, the total falls within the recommended guidelines sentence range. The order also lists three factors to support downward departure in the event the sentence is determined to be a departure sentence.
The trial court’s imposition of a 36-month term of imprisonment followed by 24 months of probation clearly constitutes a downward departure in this case. Section 921.0014, Florida Statutes, provides that “[i]f the total sentence points are greater than 40 and less than or equal to 52, the decision to incarcerate in a state prison is left to the discretion of the court. If the total sentence points are greater than 52, the sentence must be a state prison sentence calculated by total sentence points.” Appellee’s sentencing scoresheet shows total sentence points of 95.2. His guidelines scoresheet permissible sentencing range is 50 to 84 “State Prison Months.” The trial court is not authorized to depart downward from the recommended guidelines state prison sentence without written reasons. § 921.0016(l)(b), Fla.Stat. (1993). Because the trial court gave reasons for downward departure in the instant case, however, resolution of this issue is not determinative of this appeal.
A court may impose a departure sentence based on factors which are reasonably justified and are established by a preponderance of the evidence. § 921.001(6), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994). An appellate court’s task is only to review these factors and to determine whether the trial court abused its discretion. See State v. Mischler, 488 So. 2d 523 (Fla.1986); Holmes v. State, 569 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 581 So. 2d 1308 (Fla.1991). We are obliged to uphold the sentence if one factor justifies departure regardless of whether other factors are found not to justify departure. § 921.001(6), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994). In the instant case, the trial court found that the offense was committed in an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse. See § 921.0016(4)©, Fla.Stat. (1993). We find the trial court did not abuse its discretion by imposing a downward departure sentence based on this factor, and we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
MINER, WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
State v. Spioch, 706 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…nsophisticated and isolated nature of the offense. The statute requires a showing of remorse, however, which the appellant has not made. At least one reason for departure is valid, however, and will support the downward departure. State v. Chandler, 668 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 1st DCA1996); § 921.001(6). AFFIRMED. COBB and HARRIS, JJ., concur in part; dissent in part, with opinions. . We conclude that Spioch’s other points lack sufficient merit to warrant discussion. . Section 921.0016(4)(d), Florida Statutes (1…
-
State v. Silver, 723 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…The level of proof necessary to establish facts supporting a departure from a sentence under the guidelines is a preponderare of the evidence. (emphasis added); see also Green v. State, 662 So. 2d 748, 749-50 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); State v. Chandler, 668 So. 2d 1087, 1088 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). At the pre-plea and the sentencing hearings, appellee presented only legal argument to support his proposed departure grounds; the state vigorously objected to appellee’s factual contentions and introduced the detective’s…
-
State v. Darron K. Whiting, 711 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…ying on Whiting’s show of remorse under State v. Sachs, 526 So. 2d 48 (Fla.1988); the fact that “the offense was committed in an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse,” under State v. Chandler, 668 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), and section 921.0016(4)(j), Florida Statutes (1995); and the victim’s consent under State v. Johns, 576 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), and section 921.0016(4)(f), Florida Statutes (1995). Whiting’s guidelines scoresheet indica…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Mischler, 488 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 1986)
- Holmes v. State, 569 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)