Fryson v. State

533 So. 2d 294, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 666, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 1211, 1988 WL 120215
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided November 10, 1988·No. No. 70631·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

KOGAN, Justice.

We have for review Fryson v. State, 506 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), in which the district court certified the following as a question of great public importance:

DOES A TRIAL COURT’S STATEMENT, MADE AT THE TIME OF DEPARTURE FROM THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES, THAT IT WOULD DEPART FOR ANY ONE OF THE REASONS GIVEN, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER BOTH VALID AND INVALID REASONS ARE FOUND ON REVIEW, SATISFY THE STANDARDS SET FORTH IN ALBRITTON v. STATE [476 So.2d 158 (Fla.1985) ]?

Id. at 1120. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We answered the certified question in the negative in Griffis v. State, 509 So.2d 1104 (Fla.1987). Because the district court correctly found both valid and invalid reasons, we disapprove the decision below as to this issue and direct the district court to remand to the trial court for resentencing. We confine our review to the issue certified by the district court, and thus do not address any other issues raised by the parties.

It is so ordered.

EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, MCDONALD, SHAW, BARKETT and GRIMES, JJ., concur.

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

Fryson v. State, 533 So. 2d 294, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 666, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 1211, 1988 WL 120215 (Fla. 1988).

533 So. 2d 294 (Fryson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jory v. State
647 So. 2d 152 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Fryson v. State
566 So. 2d 374 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)