Aikens v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Aikens v. State

822 So. 2d 562, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10826, 2002 WL 1758207

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 31, 2002

DocketNo. 3D01-1923

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 822 So. 2d 562 (Aikens v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aikens v. State, 822 So. 2d 562, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10826, 2002 WL 1758207 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM. ■

Upon resentencing, pursuant to this court’s mandate in Aikens v. State, 762 So.2d 1060 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), the trial court imposed a departure sentence relying on various reasons. We reverse, as the reasons are invalid. ■ Only one reason merits discussion: that the defendant shot the victim twice. However, the force used in this case does not fall under the category of “barbaric or grotesque” or “extraordinary or egregious” for a case of attempted first-degree premeditated murder. See Wright v. State, 538 So.2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Bellamy v. State, 677 So.2d 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Small v. State, 667 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Murray v. State, 512 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). The force used in this case was not beyond that inherent in the crime for which defendant was convicted.

We remand for imposition of a guidelines sentence.

Sentence reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM. ■

Upon resentencing, pursuant to this court’s mandate in Aikens v. State, 762 So.2d 1060 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), the trial court imposed a departure sentence relying on various reasons. We reverse, as the reasons are invalid. ■ Only one reason merits discussion: that the defendant shot the victim twice. However, the force used in this case does not fall under the category of “barbaric or grotesque” or “extraordinary or egregious” for a case of attempted first-degree premeditated murder. See Wright v. State, 538 So.2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Bellamy v. State, 677 So.2d 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Small v. State, 667 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Murray v. State, 512 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). The force used in this case was not beyond that inherent in the crime for which defendant was convicted.

We remand for imposition of a guidelines sentence.

Sentence reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

822 So. 2d 562, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10826, 2002 WL 1758207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aikens-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack