Garcia v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Garcia v. State

775 So. 2d 308, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1454, 2000 WL 192129

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 18, 2000

DocketNo. 2D98-4383

StatusPublished

This text of 775 So. 2d 308 (Garcia 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

Garcia v. State, 775 So. 2d 308, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1454, 2000 WL 192129 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Alfredo Garcia challenges his upward departure sentences imposed after he pleaded nolo contendere to sale of cocaine and sale and delivery of marijuana. As justification for the departure the circuit court cited Garcia’s escalating pattern of [309]*309criminal activity and the temporal proximity of his convictions. After a thorough review of Garcia’s present and prior convictions, we conclude that the convictions did not meet the definition of “escalating” so as to justify the departure. See § 921.001(8), Fla. Stat. (1997); State v. Darrisaw, 660 So.2d 269 (Fla.1995)(holding that if offenses meet "definition of “escalating,” then “pattern” requirement can be satisfied either where offenses are committed in temporal proximity or are similar to each other).

We find no merit in Garcia’s argument that we should instruct the circuit court to impose a downward departure sentence. Accordingly, we vacate the ten-year sentences imposed on both counts and remand for resentencing within the guidelines.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

BLUE, A.C.J., and WHATLEY, J., Concur.

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

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Alfredo Garcia challenges his upward departure sentences imposed after he pleaded nolo contendere to sale of cocaine and sale and delivery of marijuana. As justification for the departure the circuit court cited Garcia’s escalating pattern of [309]*309criminal activity and the temporal proximity of his convictions. After a thorough review of Garcia’s present and prior convictions, we conclude that the convictions did not meet the definition of “escalating” so as to justify the departure. See § 921.001(8), Fla. Stat. (1997); State v. Darrisaw, 660 So.2d 269 (Fla.1995)(holding that if offenses meet "definition of “escalating,” then “pattern” requirement can be satisfied either where offenses are committed in temporal proximity or are similar to each other).

We find no merit in Garcia’s argument that we should instruct the circuit court to impose a downward departure sentence. Accordingly, we vacate the ten-year sentences imposed on both counts and remand for resentencing within the guidelines.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

BLUE, A.C.J., and WHATLEY, J., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

775 So. 2d 308, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1454, 2000 WL 192129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garcia-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack