Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Coney v. State

Coney v. State

560 So. 2d 429, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3197, 1990 WL 59218
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 10, 1990
DocketNo. 89-1318
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 560 So. 2d 429 (Coney 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
Coney v. State, 560 So. 2d 429, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3197, 1990 WL 59218 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals his departure sentence on the basis that no departure beyond the one-cell bump up is permitted under the guidelines. See Ree v. State, 14 F.L.W. 565 (Fla. Nov. 16, 1989); Hamilton v. State, 548 So.2d 234 (Fla.1989); Dewberry v. State, 546 So.2d 409 (Fla.1989); Lambert v. State, 545 So.2d 838 (Fla.1989); Maddox v. State, 553 So.2d 1380 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). We agree. The defendant’s departure sentence is vacated and the cause remanded for resentencing within the recommended guidelines range.

SENTENCE VACATED; CAUSE REMANDED.

DAUKSCH, COWART and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Pringal v. State
564 So. 2d 285 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Moran v. State
562 So. 2d 855 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
560 So. 2d 429, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3197, 1990 WL 59218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coney-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.