Floyd v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Floyd v. State

721 So. 2d 1163, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 518, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 1894, 1998 WL 670394

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedOctober 1, 1998

DocketNo. 92602

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 721 So. 2d 1163 (Floyd 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

Floyd v. State, 721 So. 2d 1163, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 518, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 1894, 1998 WL 670394 (Fla. 1998).

Pincite

Opinions

SHAW, Justice.

We have for review Floyd v. State, 707 So.2d 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), based on conflict with Myers v. State, 696 So.2d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), quashed, 713 So.2d 1013, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S400 (Fla.1998). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. We approve Floyd as explained below.

Charles William Floyd entered a plea of nolo contendere to driving with a suspended license, driving under the influence of alcohol resulting in serious injuries, and leaving the scene of an accident with injuries — all third-degree felonies as charged. The trial court accepted the plea. The median recommended sentence¹ under the guidelines was 5.09 years, and the recommended range was between 3.81 years to 6.36 years. The statutory maximum for each of the offenses was five years. The trial court sentenced Floyd to three concurrent six-year terms, and the district court affirmed. He now contends that the court erred in sentencing in excess of 5.09 years. We disagree.

We recently addressed this issue in Mays v. State, 23 Fla. L Weekly S387, 717 So.2d [1164]*1164515 (Fla.1998), wherein we construed the 1994 amendment to the sentencing guidelines. We explained that if the guidelines sentence — i.e., the “true” recommended guidelines sentence — exceeds the statutory-maximum, the court is authorized to impose the guidelines sentence. In the present case, the “true” recommended guidelines sentence, i.e., six years, exceeds the statutory maximum, i.e., five years. The court thus was authorized to exceed the maximum and impose the six-year terms. We approve the result in Floyd on this issue.²

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., and OVERTON and WELLS, JJ., concur. PARIENTE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which KOGAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

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

SHAW, Justice.

We have for review Floyd v. State, 707 So.2d 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), based on conflict with Myers v. State, 696 So.2d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), quashed, 713 So.2d 1013, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S400 (Fla.1998). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. We approve Floyd as explained below.

Charles William Floyd entered a plea of nolo contendere to driving with a suspended license, driving under the influence of alcohol resulting in serious injuries, and leaving the scene of an accident with injuries — all third-degree felonies as charged. The trial court accepted the plea. The median recommended sentence¹ under the guidelines was 5.09 years, and the recommended range was between 3.81 years to 6.36 years. The statutory maximum for each of the offenses was five years. The trial court sentenced Floyd to three concurrent six-year terms, and the district court affirmed. He now contends that the court erred in sentencing in excess of 5.09 years. We disagree.

We recently addressed this issue in Mays v. State, 23 Fla. L Weekly S387, 717 So.2d [1164]*1164515 (Fla.1998), wherein we construed the 1994 amendment to the sentencing guidelines. We explained that if the guidelines sentence — i.e., the “true” recommended guidelines sentence — exceeds the statutory-maximum, the court is authorized to impose the guidelines sentence. In the present case, the “true” recommended guidelines sentence, i.e., six years, exceeds the statutory maximum, i.e., five years. The court thus was authorized to exceed the maximum and impose the six-year terms. We approve the result in Floyd on this issue.²

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., and OVERTON and WELLS, JJ., concur. PARIENTE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which KOGAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

721 So. 2d 1163, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 518, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 1894, 1998 WL 670394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/floyd-v-state-fla-1998.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack