THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
TRAVIS SCOTT, 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 State appealed a trial court's downward departure sentence imposed after the defendant's guilty plea to third-degree felony charges. Although the appellate court agreed the trial court failed to articulate sufficient basis for the departure, it found the issue moot because the defendant subsequently violated community control and was resentenced to the mandatory guideline minimum of 36.9 months.
Although the trial court failed to articulate a sufficient basis and requisite factual findings for the downward departure, the appeal is rendered moot because the defendant was subsequently resentenced to the mandatory 36.9-month sentencing guideline minimum following a violation of community control. The trial court had jurisdiction to conduct the community control revocation hearing and impose the mandated sentence despite the pending appeal.
[1] A trial court's failure to articulate a sufficient basis and requisite factual findings for a downward departure sentence is rendered moot when the defendant subsequently…
[2] A trial court retains jurisdiction to conduct a revocation hearing on an order of community control that has been appealed but not stayed pending review.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Although we agree with the State that the trial court failed to articulate a sufficient basis and requisite factual findings for the downward departure, because of the subsequent proceedings involved, this issue has been rendered moot.”
Establishes that while the trial court erred in not articulating proper grounds for the departure, the error became moot due to subsequent events.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTravis Scott was charged by information with two counts of third-degree felony violations (burglary and grand theft) and other charges. The State file…
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 Community Control Program cases and more on FLexlaw
The State of Florida (the “State”) appeals the imposition of a downward departure following a guilty plea entered by Travis Scott (the “Defendant”). Although we agree with the State that the trial court failed to articulate a sufficient basis and requisite factual findings for the downward departure, because of the subsequent proceedings involved, this issue has been rendered moot.
The Defendant was charged by information with, inter alia, two counts of third degree felony violations.1 The State then filed notice of its intent to seek an enhanced penalty under Florida’s habitual offender statute.2 § 775.084, Fla. Stat. (2009). Pursuant to the sentencing guidelines scoresheet, the underlying case mandated that the trial court impose a minimum sentence of 36.9 months. At the plea hearing, the trial court qualified the Defendant as a habitual offender, but imposed a downward departure of two years in community control followed by three years of supervised probation, with the special conditions of successfully completing the community control program and paying restitution to the victim. In so doing, the trial court was without the benefit of our recent decision of State v. Ford, 48 So.3d 948 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).
However, during the pendency of this appeal, the Defendant violated the terms of the community control program, and was subsequently sentenced to 36.9 months in the Department of Corrections as a habitual offender. Because “the trial court does have jurisdiction to conduct a revocation hearing on an order of [community control] which has been appealed but not stayed pending review[,]” the trial court was not prohibited “from entertaining an affidavit of [community control] violation and accepting the defendant’s [admission to] violation of the terms and conditions ... and subsequently sentencing him.” Loeb v. State, 387 So.2d 433, 436 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Accordingly, the trial court lawfully accepted the Defendant’s admission as to the community control violation, and thereafter imposed the 36.9 month sentence as mandated by the sentencing guidelines scoresheet.
Because the Defendant has now been sentenced to the minimum sentencing guideline of 36.9 months, the issue on appeal has been rendered moot.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Loeb v. State, 387 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- State v. Ford, 48 So. 3d 948 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)