GENA MARIE LAWSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
The court held that a resentencing under Heggs is de novo, allowing for an upward departure sentence if supported by written reasons existing at the original sentencing.
[1] A resentencing proceeding conducted pursuant to Heggs v. …
[2] When a trial court resentences a defendant under Heggs v. …
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 intelligenceAppellant Gena Marie Lawson appealed an upward departure sentence imposed after her original sentence was corrected based on Heggs v. State. She argue…
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 Heggs V. State cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Gena Marie Lawson, appeals from an upward departure sentence imposed after her motion to correct her original sentence was granted based on Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000). She complains that the trial court was precluded from imposing an upward departure sentence, because her original sentence was not a departure; that the judge failed to support the departure sentence with written reasons existing at the time of the original sentencing; and that the aggravating factors assigned as reasons for the departure are not supported in this case. Our standard of review of an appeal such as this is abuse of discretion, and we conclude from our examination of the record that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering an upward departure sentence.
We agree with the Fifth District that once a defendant is resentenced pursuant to Heggs, the second sentencing proceeding is de novo. See Trotter v. State, 801 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). Accord Bull v. State, 782 So. 2d 921, 922 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (stating that if a trial court decides to depart from the sentencing guidelines at a resentencing proceeding under Heggs, the departure must be supported by written reasons existing at the time of the original sentencing). Thus, the trial court had the authority at the de novo sentencing hearing to exercise its discretion in imposing an upward departure sentence, so long as it was not more severe than the original sentence. Bull, Id. And see Rivera v. State, 806 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).
Moreover, the three statutory aggravating circumstances provided by the trial judge as reasons justifying the departure were reduced to writing on the sentencing form, which was signed by the judge, as well as in the written order that ruled on the motion to correct. Because all of the court’s reasons, which existed at the time of the original sentencing, are supported by competent, substantial evidence, we find no abuse of discretion in the imposition of an upward departure sentence.
AFFIRMED.
ERVIN, BENTON and POLSTON, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shores v. State, 15 So. 3d 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…(2) he had been designated a sexual predator on account of the original offense. Upward Departures Under Section 921.001(6) On direct appeal, we review the imposition of an upward departure sentence for an abuse of discretion. See Lawson v. State, 812 So. 2d 518, 518 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). When applicable,1 section 921.001(6), Florida Statutes (2007), affords discretion to trial courts to impose a departure sentence if at least one reason justifying departure is set forth in writing at the time of sentencing:…
-
Lanier v. State, 839 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…[*902] PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Lawson v. State, 812 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 829 So. 2d 918 (Fla.2002); Rivera v. State, 806 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1st DCA), cause dismissed, No. SC02-1370, — So. 2d - (Fla. June 21, 2002). See also Trotter v. State, 825 So. 2d 362 (Fla.2002). ERVIN, WOLF and VAN NO…
-
Roselene Wilkinson v. State, 957 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.703(d)(30)(A); see also Lawson v. State, 812 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Trotter v. State, 801 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Kedrick Bull, IV v. State, 782 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Rabb v. Newton, 806 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Rivera v. State, 806 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)