Cohen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cohen v. State

656 So. 2d 525, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5726, 1995 WL 316349

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 26, 1995

DocketNo. 94-429

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 656 So. 2d 525 (Cohen 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

Cohen v. State, 656 So. 2d 525, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5726, 1995 WL 316349 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinions

GRIFFIN, Judge.

We affirm the defendant’s convictions for attempted first degree murder with a firearm, burglary of a structure while armed, two counts of robbery with a firearm, three counts of aggravated assault with a firearm, two counts of grand theft auto, evidence tampering, and arson. We are bound, however, to vacate the departure sentences of life imprisonment imposed by the lower court.¹ The supreme court has clearly and repeatedly announced that guidelines departure orders must be filed contemporaneously with the announced departure sentence. Blair ¶. State, 598 So.2d 1068 (Fla.1992); State v. Lyles, 576 So.2d 706 (Fla.1991); Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla.1990). The departure order in this case shows that it was prepared and filed ten days later, which plainly violates the supreme court’s requirement. For this reason, we vacate the departure sentences and remand to the lower court to resentenee defendant within the guidelines.

AFFIRMED in part; and REMANDED.

PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ„ concur.

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

GRIFFIN, Judge.

We affirm the defendant’s convictions for attempted first degree murder with a firearm, burglary of a structure while armed, two counts of robbery with a firearm, three counts of aggravated assault with a firearm, two counts of grand theft auto, evidence tampering, and arson. We are bound, however, to vacate the departure sentences of life imprisonment imposed by the lower court.¹ The supreme court has clearly and repeatedly announced that guidelines departure orders must be filed contemporaneously with the announced departure sentence. Blair ¶. State, 598 So.2d 1068 (Fla.1992); State v. Lyles, 576 So.2d 706 (Fla.1991); Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla.1990). The departure order in this case shows that it was prepared and filed ten days later, which plainly violates the supreme court’s requirement. For this reason, we vacate the departure sentences and remand to the lower court to resentenee defendant within the guidelines.

AFFIRMED in part; and REMANDED.

PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

656 So. 2d 525, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5726, 1995 WL 316349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack