THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
RAMON PEREZ, 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 downward departure sentence must be supported by written reasons, and the oral reason given by the trial court was legally insufficient.
[1] A downward departure sentence must be supported by written reasons, and oral reasons alone are legally insufficient.
[2] A downward departure from sentencing guidelines must be based on a valid legal reason with adequate factual support.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court offered a sentence below the sentencing guidelines, stating reservations about the state's case as a reason for departure. The state o…
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 Valid Legal Ground For Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State appeals from a downward departure sentence. For the following reasons, we reverse.
The trial court offered the defendant a sentence of fourteen months as a habitual offender with credit for time served. The state objected to the offer because it was below the guidelines.1 The trial court noted the objection, and, apparently as a ground for the downward departure, stated that it had reservations about whether the state could prove its case. The defendant accepted the court’s offer, and the court imposed the sentence. The state appeals.
We reverse because the downward departure was not supported by any written reasons, and the oral reason given (even if reduced to writing) is legally insufficient. See Banks v. State, 732 So. 2d 1065 (Fla.1999) (holding that before trial court can impose downward departure, there must be a “valid legal ground and adequate factual support for that ground.... ”); State v. Rinkins, 646 So. 2d 727 (Fla.1994) (“If a trial judge chooses to impose a sentence more lenient than that required by section 775.084, the judge must still adhere to sentencing guidelines and must state appropriate reasons for any downward departure from guidelines.”); State v. Stanton, 781 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (holding that a departure from sentencing guidelines must be based on a valid legal reason); Hoffman v. State, 700 So. 2d 765, 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); State v. McLeod, 652 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); State v. Douglas, 744 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
Accordingly, we vacate the sentence. On remand, the defendant must be afforded the opportunity to withdraw his plea. See State v. Meyers, 708 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); State v. Gordon, 645 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), rev. denied, 652 So. 2d 816 (Fla.1995); State v. Stewart, 749 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
. We disagree with the defendant's argument that this objection was not sufficiently specific to preserve the issue for appeal. See, e.g., State v. Turro, 724 So. 2d 1216, 1217 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Green, 932 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…e downward departure, and the state adequately preserved the issue below, see State v. Brownell, 922 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); see also State v. Paulk, 813 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), review denied, 832 So. 2d 105 (Fla.2002); State v. Perez, 802 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), review denied, 823 So. 2d 125 (Fla.2002); State v. Turro, 724 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), the sentence is reversed and the cause remanded either to sentence defendant within the guidelines or to permit him to withdraw his ple…
-
State v. Roberts, 963 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…state did not participate, because it was (of course) unaccompanied by oral or written [*748] reasons justifying the departure. See State v. Barr, 947 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); State v. Ahua, 947 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); State v. Perez, 802 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), review denied, 823 So. 2d 125 (Fla.2002); State v. Paulk, 813 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), review denied, 832 So. 2d 105 (Fla.2002). Roberts’s only position for affirmance is that the so-called general objection1 to the senten…
-
State v. Geronimo Mendez, 835 So. 2d 375 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…entered on the basis of a plea agreement with the trial court alone without the concurrence and over the objection1 of the state is vacated. State v. Paulk, 813 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), review denied, 832 So. 2d 105 (Fla.2002); State v. Perez, 802 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), review denied, 823 So. 2d 125 (Fla.2002); State v. Johnson, 796 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). The cause is remanded for resen-tencing or, at the option of the defendant, withdrawal of the plea and further proceedings consistent…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Donald B. Banks v. State, 732 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 1999)
- State v. Australia Ozell Rinkins, Jr., 646 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 1994)
- State v. Gordon, 645 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- State v. Meyers, 708 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- State v. Gonzalo Canovas Turro, 724 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- State v. Stewart, 749 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Hoffman v. State, 700 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- State v. Stanton, 781 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
- State v. McLEOD, 652 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- State v. Douglas, 744 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)