Coleman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Coleman v. State

547 So. 2d 1279, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2048, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4797, 1989 WL 99211

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 29, 1989·No. No. 88-2974·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals his judgment of conviction and sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Having reviewed the record, we find that none of the grounds asserted by appellant for reversal of his conviction present error. See Morra v. State, 467 So.2d 742 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 476 So.2d 674 (Fla.1985); Peek v. State, 395 So.2d 492 (Fla.), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 964, 101 S.Ct. 2036, 68 L.Ed.2d 342 (1981). We remand the cause, however, for resentencing within the guidelines, because, as the State concedes, the trial court failed to provide clear and convincing reasons for the upward departure from the applicable sentencing guidelines.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals his judgment of conviction and sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Having reviewed the record, we find that none of the grounds asserted by appellant for reversal of his conviction present error. See Morra v. State, 467 So.2d 742 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 476 So.2d 674 (Fla.1985); Peek v. State, 395 So.2d 492 (Fla.), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 964, 101 S.Ct. 2036, 68 L.Ed.2d 342 (1981). We remand the cause, however, for resentencing within the guidelines, because, as the State concedes, the trial court failed to provide clear and convincing reasons for the upward departure from the applicable sentencing guidelines.

Coleman v. State, 547 So. 2d 1279, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2048, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4797, 1989 WL 99211 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

547 So. 2d 1279 (Coleman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related