Garcia v. State

775 So. 2d 308, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1454, 2000 WL 192129
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Garcia v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 722 So. 2d 905
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 18, 2000·No. No. 2D98-4383·Published

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

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

775 So. 2d 308 (Garcia v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Darrisaw
660 So. 2d 269 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)