DAMIEN TOWNES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 1995 Sentencing Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, Acting Chief Judge.
The appellant challenges an order revoking his community control and the sentences imposed upon revocation.
We affirm the revocation of community control, but we remand for reconsideration of the sentences. The appellant was sentenced to concurrent terms of sixty-five months’ incarceration for burglary of a dwelling and grand theft in circuit court case number 96-11244 and for burglary of a dwelling in circuit court ease number 98-06879. The sentences were imposed pursuant to the 1995 sentencing guidelines. The offenses in case number 96-11244 were committed on April 15, 1996, within the window for challenge pursuant to Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000).
Because the court1 in Heggs determined that the 1995 sentencing guidelines were unconstitutional, we remand this case to the trial court to reconsider the sentences in case number 96-11244. See Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
The offense in case number 98-06879, however, was committed on March 3, 1998, after the window for challenge pursuant to Heggs had closed.
Accordingly, the sentence in case number 98-06879 need not be reconsidered.
STRINGER, J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., (Senior) Judge, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (43 total)
-
Boca Burger, Inc. v. Forum, 912 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2005)…t be used to justify unprofessional conduct by elevating the perceived duty to zealously represent over all other duties.” Lingle v. Dion, 776 So. 2d 1073, 1078 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (alterations in original) (quoting Visoly v. Sec. Pac. Credit Corp., 768 So. 2d 482, 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)). Section 57.105, as well as the Florida Bar rules of professional conduct and even the oath of admission to the Florida Bar, all warn — -if any warning were needed — that counsel must be governed by considerations other than…
-
Wendy's OF N.E. Fla., Inc. v. Vandergriff, 865 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…(c) as having been undertaken primarily to delay or prolong the resolution of the litigation, or to harass or to maliciously injure another; or (c) [sic] as asserting material factual statements that are false. Visoly v. Sec. Pacific Credit Corp., 768 So. 2d 482, 491 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (footnotes omitted). While the revised statute incorporates the “not supported by the material facts or would not be supported by application of then-existing law to those material facts” standard instead of the “frivolous”…
-
Mullins v. Kennelly, 847 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…section 57.105 is to discourage baseless claims, stonewall defenses and sham appeals in civil litigation by placing a price tag through attorney’s fees awards on losing parties who engage in these activities.”); Visoly v. Sec. Pacific Credit Corp., 768 So. 2d 482, 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (“The general policy behind awarding attorney’s fees for bringing a frivolous action is to discourage baseless claims, stonewall defenses, and sham appeals by sanctioning those responsible for unnecessary litigation costs.”).…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 43 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)