Ashley v. State

510 So. 2d 970, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1615
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 2, 1987
Docket86-1879
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 510 So. 2d 970 (Ashley 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
Ashley v. State, 510 So. 2d 970, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1615 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Opinion

510 So.2d 970 (1987)

Vincent ASHLEY, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 86-1879.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

July 2, 1987.
Rehearing Denied August 11, 1987.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Brynn Newton, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Kevin Kitpatrick Carson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

COBB, Judge.

Vincent Ashley appeals his departure guidelines sentence on the basis that the trial court did not provide clear and convincing reasons for the departure. The trial court's bases for departure can be summarized as follows:

1. The defendant's probationary status at the time of the offense;
2. The defendant's unamenability to rehabilitation;
3. The defendant's habitual offender status;
4. The defendant's prior admission to participation in a first-degree murder, armed robbery, attempted armed robbery and burglary of a dwelling, for which he had been granted immunity;
5. Escalating pattern of criminal conduct;
6. The defendant's behavior in prison;
7. That the defendant poses a threat to society.

*971 Of these seven reasons given for departure, only two are proper: The defendant's unamenability to rehabilitation and his escalating pattern of criminal conduct. See Keys v. State, 500 So.2d 134 (Fla. 1986); Allen v. State, 12 FLW 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA June 17, 1987); McNealy v. State, 502 So.2d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Leath v. State, 487 So.2d 384 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Lee v. State, 486 So.2d 709 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Keen v. State, 481 So.2d 1274 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Thus, this case is remanded for the trial court to consider whether it would depart from the recommended guidelines sentence regardless of the existence of the invalid reasons. See Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1985).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Busby v. State
556 So. 2d 1208 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Maddox v. State
553 So. 2d 1380 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Robinson v. State
530 So. 2d 1085 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Garcia v. State
521 So. 2d 278 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Cotton v. State
516 So. 2d 1077 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Ruiz v. State
516 So. 2d 1057 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Mitchell v. State
513 So. 2d 1122 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
510 So. 2d 970, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ashley-v-state-fladistctapp-1987.