Burkett v. State

681 So. 2d 741, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5627, 1996 WL 284268
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Burkett v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 731 So. 2d 695
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 31, 1996·No. No. 95-00845·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Richard Burkett challenges his judgment and sentence alleging the trial court erred in denying his amended motion for a statement of particulars and in sentencing beyond the guidelines without written reasons. We affirm the denial of the motion for statement of particulars since the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding the state could not allege a more specific time. Dell’Orfano v. State, 616 So.2d 33 (Fla.1993). This case is remanded to the trial court for resentencing within the guidelines because there are no written reasons for departure in the record.

[742]*742The judgment is affirmed with directions to resentence Burkett within the applicable sentencing guidelines.

FRANK, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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

Burkett v. State, 681 So. 2d 741, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5627, 1996 WL 284268 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

681 So. 2d 741 (Burkett v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dell'Orfano v. State
616 So. 2d 33 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1993)