Barron v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Barron v. State

647 So. 2d 225, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9828, 1994 WL 558495

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 14, 1994

DocketNo. 93-00949

StatusPublished

This text of 647 So. 2d 225 (Barron 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

Barron v. State, 647 So. 2d 225, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9828, 1994 WL 558495 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

FULMER, Judge.

Terry Barron challenges his judgment and sentence for two counts of attempted murder in the first degree and burglary of a dwelling with assault or battery with a dangerous weapon. We affirm. However, we agree that two of the four reasons given for the upward departure sentence are invalid.

Extraordinary physical injury to the victims cannot be used as a basis for departure because the victims’ permanent scarring and disfigurement were factored into the seoresheet. See Hall v. State, 517 So.2d 692 (Fla.1988). Likewise, excessive use of force is an invalid reason because it was factored into the guidelines by scoring points for victim injury. See Waychoff v. State, 624 So.2d 392 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Nevertheless, because the remaining reasons for departure are valid, we affirm the departure sentence. See § 921.001(5), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1992); Nixon v. State, 595 So.2d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

FRANK, C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.

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

FULMER, Judge.

Terry Barron challenges his judgment and sentence for two counts of attempted murder in the first degree and burglary of a dwelling with assault or battery with a dangerous weapon. We affirm. However, we agree that two of the four reasons given for the upward departure sentence are invalid.

Extraordinary physical injury to the victims cannot be used as a basis for departure because the victims’ permanent scarring and disfigurement were factored into the seoresheet. See Hall v. State, 517 So.2d 692 (Fla.1988). Likewise, excessive use of force is an invalid reason because it was factored into the guidelines by scoring points for victim injury. See Waychoff v. State, 624 So.2d 392 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Nevertheless, because the remaining reasons for departure are valid, we affirm the departure sentence. See § 921.001(5), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1992); Nixon v. State, 595 So.2d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

FRANK, C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

647 So. 2d 225, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9828, 1994 WL 558495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barron-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack