Bunch v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bunch v. State

399 So. 2d 471, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20006

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 3, 1981

DocketNo. 80-2277

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 399 So. 2d 471 (Bunch 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

Bunch v. State, 399 So. 2d 471, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20006 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The state charged appellant, a juvenile, as an adult pursuant to section 39.-04(2)(e)(4), Florida Statutes (1979). After appellant pled nolo contendere, the trial court sentenced appellant as an adult. When a juvenile is sentenced as an adult, section 39.111(6), Florida Statutes (1979), requires that the trial court make specific factual findings based upon the criteria enumerated in that section. The record in the instant case does not reveal the required written findings of fact, and we must vacate the sentence. See Stallins v. State, 385 So.2d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). However, there being no merit to the other point raised on appeal, the judgment is affirmed and the cause remanded only for resentencing in accordance with section 39.-111(6).

BOARDMAN, Acting C. J., and OTT and DANAHY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The state charged appellant, a juvenile, as an adult pursuant to section 39.-04(2)(e)(4), Florida Statutes (1979). After appellant pled nolo contendere, the trial court sentenced appellant as an adult. When a juvenile is sentenced as an adult, section 39.111(6), Florida Statutes (1979), requires that the trial court make specific factual findings based upon the criteria enumerated in that section. The record in the instant case does not reveal the required written findings of fact, and we must vacate the sentence. See Stallins v. State, 385 So.2d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). However, there being no merit to the other point raised on appeal, the judgment is affirmed and the cause remanded only for resentencing in accordance with section 39.-111(6).

BOARDMAN, Acting C. J., and OTT and DANAHY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

399 So. 2d 471, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20006, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bunch-v-state-fladistctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack