Garaguso v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Garaguso v. State

648 So. 2d 327, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 461, 1995 WL 18393

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 20, 1995

DocketNo. 94-831

StatusPublished

This text of 648 So. 2d 327 (Garaguso 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

Garaguso v. State, 648 So. 2d 327, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 461, 1995 WL 18393 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

W. SHARP, Judge.

The state concedes error in sentencing Garaguso to three and one-half years incarceration, followed by eighteen months community control, pursuant to the applicable guidelines sentence without providing written reasons for departure. It is now established that a combined sanction of incarceration and community control in a bracket allowing one or the other, constitutes a departure sentence, even if the combined time periods do not exceed the maximum allowable period of time permitted by the guidelines. State v. Davis, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994); Felty v. State, 630 So.2d 1092 (Fla.1994). Accordingly, we quash the sentence and remand for resentencing. See Hicks v. State, 640 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Brown v. State, 639 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).

AFFIRMED in part; SENTENCE QUASHED; REMANDED for resentencing.

GOSHORN and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

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

W. SHARP, Judge.

The state concedes error in sentencing Garaguso to three and one-half years incarceration, followed by eighteen months community control, pursuant to the applicable guidelines sentence without providing written reasons for departure. It is now established that a combined sanction of incarceration and community control in a bracket allowing one or the other, constitutes a departure sentence, even if the combined time periods do not exceed the maximum allowable period of time permitted by the guidelines. State v. Davis, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994); Felty v. State, 630 So.2d 1092 (Fla.1994). Accordingly, we quash the sentence and remand for resentencing. See Hicks v. State, 640 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Brown v. State, 639 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).

AFFIRMED in part; SENTENCE QUASHED; REMANDED for resentencing.

GOSHORN and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

648 So. 2d 327, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 461, 1995 WL 18393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garaguso-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

W. SHARP, Judge.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack