JUAN RENE SAID, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2007-02-14
No. 3D05-1670
Before RAMIREZ, SUAREZ, and LAGOA, JJ.
948 So. 2d 919 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2007)

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.

Synopsis

Juan Rene Said appealed his probation revocation sentence and direct criminal contempt conviction. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded, finding the trial judge failed to specify aggravating circumstances on the record and denied Said due process protections in the contempt finding.


Holding

The court reversed the sentences on both grounds. The trial judge erred in basing the sentence on aggravating circumstances without specifying reasons on the record. Additionally, the contempt sentence was reversed because Said was neither afforded an opportunity to show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt nor permitted to present mitigating circumstances.


Headnotes

[1] A sentence based on unspecified aggravating circumstances must be reversed and remanded.

[2] A defendant must be afforded an opportunity to show cause why they should not be adjudged in contempt and to present mitigating circumstances before a contempt sentence i…

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“Because the trial judge erred in basing his sentence on unspecified aggravating circumstances, we reverse the sentence and remand for an evidentiary hearing based strictly upon the terms of the plea agreement underlying the probation violation as outlined in the record.”

Establishes the primary basis for reversal: failure to specify aggravating circumstances on the record violates sentencing requirements.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

In 2004, Said was sentenced for grand theft auto and placed on probation for one year. In 2005, he pleaded guilty to a probation violation for drug us…

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.


Opinion of the Court
SUAREZ, J.

SUAREZ, J.

This is an appeal from an order of revocation of probation and sentence, entered upon a guilty plea, and a conviction and sentence for direct criminal contempt. We reverse and remand.

In 2004, the defendant was sentenced for grand theft auto and placed on probation for a period of one year. In 2005, he pled guilty to a violation of probation for use of drugs. As part of the terms of the plea agreement, the defendant agreed to plead guilty in exchange for a sentence of five years with a furlough with the possibility of mitigating the sentence by assisting the police conditioned upon favorable results for his assistance. At the defendant’s plea colloquy, he admitted his violation of probation, and the trial judge revoked the defendant’s probation and sentenced him to five years in state prison with a thirty-day furlough to give him a chance to mitigate his sentence. The terms of the plea included providing Detective Edwards of the Miami-Dade Police Department with information leading to the recovery of a '66 Corvette engine and locating a chop shop in Cutler Ridge, at least seven vehicles, five to seven air boat parts and a Miami fencing operation.

At the defendant’s sentencing hearing, Detective Edwards reported on the status of the defendant’s cooperation. He testified that the defendant produced a chop shop with several stolen vehicle parts, a Corvette and a stolen handgun as well as a lead to a tractor. The detective was of the opinion that the defendant had accomplished one-third of what he had agreed to do. The trial judge sentenced the defendant to five years and reduced the sentence to four-and-one-half years plus time served with the addition of six months for direct criminal contempt of court for using profanity when the sentence was pronounced. The judge stated on the record that one year of the sentence was for aggravating circumstances.1 The trial judge failed to delineate on the record the reasons for the aggravating circumstances as part of the sentence. Because the trial judge erred in basing his sentence on unspecified aggravating circumstances, we reverse the sentence and remand for an evidentiary hearing based strictly upon the terms of the plea agreement underlying the probation violation as outlined in the record. See McCoy v. State, 599 So. 2d 645 (Fla.1992); Espinosa v. State, 688 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.170(g).

We also reverse the sentence for direct criminal contempt on grounds that the defendant was neither afforded the opportunity to show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt nor to present mitigating circumstances. See Poitier v. Spears, 750 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Thaxton v. State, 525 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).

Reversed and remanded with directions.

. The detective stated that the defendant provided false leads on interrelated narcotics investigations which were occurring in conjunction with the chop shop offenses. Help in the narcotics investigation was not part of the plea colloquy specified by the court to mitigate the sentence.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw