Darrow v. State
This text of 789 So. 2d 552 (Darrow 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.
Opinion
Jamal DARROW, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Raymond M. Warren of Warren & Warren, P.A., Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Angela D. McCravy, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
SHARP, W., J.
Darrow appeals from his ten-year sentence he received, after pleading nolo contendere to attempted robbery with a firearm. He sought to be sentenced as a Youthful Offender and all parties agree he met the required criteria. However, the trial court ruled the 1999 revision to section 775.087(2)(a) (known as the 10-20-life statute) superseded the Youthful Offender Act and mandated that the court impose a sentence pursuant to the statute. The trial court stated it would have sentenced Darrow as a Youthful Offender had it been allowed to do so. We disagree and reverse.
*553 In State v. Wooten, 782 So.2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), our sister court upheld a trial court's ruling that the minimum mandatory provisions of the 10-20-life statute do not supersede the Youthful Offender sentencing provisions. And in State v. Krasky, 789 So.2d 1005 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), we affirmed a similar ruling, citing to Wooten.
Accordingly, we vacate the sentence imposed and remand for resentencing pursuant to the Youthful Offender Statute.
Sentence VACATED; REMANDED for Resentencing.
COBB and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
789 So. 2d 552, 2001 WL 844454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darrow-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.