CARLOS MANDRI, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
CARLOS MANDRI, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
767 So. 2d 523
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2000)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000); State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla.1986).
Other
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING/CERTIFICATION
PER CURIAM.
We deny defendant’s motion for rehearing. We grant defendant’s motion to certify the following question of great public importance:
WHERE A TRIAL COURT FAILS TO FILE WRITTEN REASONS IN SUPPORT OF A GUIDELINES DEPARTURE SENTENCE BUT, THEREAFTER, IN RESPONSE TO A FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.800(B) MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT, DOES FILE WRITTEN REASONS JUSTIFYING THE DEPARTURE, IS DEFENDANT ENTITLED TO A REVERSAL AND A REMAND FOR A GUIDELINES SENTENCE, UNDER MADDOX v. STATE, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000)?
Question certified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mandri v. State, 813 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2002)…PER CURIAM. We have for review Mandri v. State, 767 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), reh’g denied and question certified, 767 So. 2d at 524, in which the Third District certified the following question as one of great public importance: WHERE A TRIAL COURT FAILS TO FILE WRITTEN REASONS IN SUPPORT OF A GUIDELINES…
Authorities Cited
- State v. DiGUILIO, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986)
- Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2000)