ERIC PRESSLEY, 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 reversed a departure sentence because the trial court failed to provide written findings explaining the departure as required by statute, and remanded for resentencing within the guidelines.
A trial court's upward departure sentence must be accompanied by written findings of fact explaining the departure, and failure to provide such findings requires reversal and resentencing within the guidelines.
[1] A trial court's upward departure from sentencing guidelines must be accompanied by written findings explaining the departure, and failure to provide such findings require…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePressley was resentenced for an offense occurring between July 12, 1997 and July 12, 2002. The trial court imposed an upward departure sentence withou…
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 Findings Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a direct appeal from a resentencing for an offense that occurred sometime between July 12, 1997 and July 12, 2002. The challenged sentence was pronounced under section 921.0016(l)(c), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.703(d)(29) (1996). Although the trial court departed upwardly from the sentencing guidelines, the trial court prepared no written findings for departure as is required by section 921.0016(l)(c), nor was a transcript of sentencing signed and entered into the file at any time before appeal was taken. See Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89, 106-08 (Fla.2000). Although the appellant complained of the lack of written reasons (or signed, filed transcript) in a motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), the trial court denied the motion without stating reasons for departure (or signing and filing the transcript). This failure distinguishes the case from Mandri v. State, 813 So. 2d 65, 66 (Fla.2002), and brings it under Butler v. State, 765 So. 2d 274, 275 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Accordingly, here, as in Butler, we reverse and remand for sentencing under the guidelines. See also Haynes v. State, 843 So. 2d 993, 994 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Edwards v. State, 770 So. 2d 179, 179-80 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Edmondson v. State, 777 So. 2d 434, 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
REVERSED and REMANDED with directions that the trial court impose a guidelines sentence.
KAHN, C.J., and ERVIN and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Murphy v. State, 161 So. 3d 1282 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…that the filing of a sentencing transcript satisfies the statutory requirement of “written findings.” Moreover, the filing of an unsigned copy of the sentencing transcript would not satisfy rule 3.704(d)(27)(A), if it applied. See Pressley v. State, 921 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Boynton v. State, 473 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 4th DCA) (en banc), approved, 478 So. 2d 351 (Fla.1985). But see Esquivel v. State, 958 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (holding that the trial court’s failure to sign the written transcripti…
-
Esquivel v. State, 958 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…istinction between a complete failure to file written reasons for departure and technical procedural errors, generally late filings, which do not prejudice defendants. See and compare Matchett v. State, 791 So. 2d 1087 (Fla.2001); Pressley v. State, 921 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Butler v. State, 765 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); with Mandri v. State, 813 So. 2d 65 (Fla.2002); Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000); Beck v. State, 817 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Weiss v. State, 720 So. 2d 1113 (…
-
State v. Dunn, 9 So. 3d 666 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…iedge, 670 So. 2d 191, 192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (instructing the trial court to sentence the defendant to a sentence within the guidelines on remand when the trial court had failed to give [*667] reasons for the downward departure); Pressley v. State, 921 So. 2d 736, 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (reversing the defendant’s upward departure sentence where the trial court failed to state its reasons for the upward departure and directing the trial court to impose a guidelines sentence on remand). Accordingly, we revers…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2000)
- Mandri v. State, 813 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2002)
- Eli Butler, Jr. v. State, 765 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Edwards v. State, 770 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Edmondson v. State, 777 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Kodi Lonshay Haynes v. State, 843 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)