Flournoy v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Flournoy v. State

522 So. 2d 340, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 100, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 181, 1988 WL 10267

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedFebruary 11, 1988

DocketNo. 70713

StatusPublished

This text of 522 So. 2d 340 (Flournoy v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Flournoy v. State, 522 So. 2d 340, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 100, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 181, 1988 WL 10267 (Fla. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution, based upon the district court’s certification of the following question:

May the quantity of drugs involved in a crime be a proper reason to support departure from the sentencing guidelines?

Flournoy v. State, 507 So.2d 668, 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).

We recently answered this question in the negative in Atwaters v. State, 519 So. 2d 611 (Fla.1988). Accordingly, we disapprove the decision below as to this issue and direct the district court to remand to the trial court for resentencing.

It is so ordered.

[341]*341McDonald, C.J., and OVERTON, ERHLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

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