Dougherty v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dougherty v. State

474 So. 2d 11, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1934, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15214

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 13, 1985

DocketNo. BC-316

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 474 So. 2d 11 (Dougherty 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

Dougherty v. State, 474 So. 2d 11, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1934, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15214 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence imposed pursuant to the sentencing guidelines, Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701. We reverse and remand for resentencing.

The appellant was sentenced on September 4, 1984 for an offense committed on April 6, 1984. During the interim between the commission of the offense and the date of sentencing, the sentencing guidelines were amended in a manner disadvantageous to the appellant resulting in a presumptive sentence longer than the presumptive sentence prescribed by the guidelines in effect at the time appellant’s offense was committed. Under such circumstances, it is error to apply the amended guidelines. Richardson v. State, 472 So.2d 1278, (Fla.1st DCA 1985). Compare Dewberry v. State, 472 So.2d 792, (Fla.1st DCA 1985), wherein the court affirmed the application of the amended guidelines to a pre-amendment offense because the prescribed presumptive penalty for the offense was the same under both the original guidelines and the amended guidelines.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

MILLS and SMITH, JJ., concur.

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

THOMPSON, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence imposed pursuant to the sentencing guidelines, Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701. We reverse and remand for resentencing.

The appellant was sentenced on September 4, 1984 for an offense committed on April 6, 1984. During the interim between the commission of the offense and the date of sentencing, the sentencing guidelines were amended in a manner disadvantageous to the appellant resulting in a presumptive sentence longer than the presumptive sentence prescribed by the guidelines in effect at the time appellant’s offense was committed. Under such circumstances, it is error to apply the amended guidelines. Richardson v. State, 472 So.2d 1278, (Fla.1st DCA 1985). Compare Dewberry v. State, 472 So.2d 792, (Fla.1st DCA 1985), wherein the court affirmed the application of the amended guidelines to a pre-amendment offense because the prescribed presumptive penalty for the offense was the same under both the original guidelines and the amended guidelines.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

MILLS and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

474 So. 2d 11, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1934, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15214, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dougherty-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack