Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Hankey v. State

Hankey v. State

458 So. 2d 1143
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 18, 1984
Docket84-162, 84-203
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 458 So. 2d 1143 (Hankey 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
Hankey v. State, 458 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

458 So.2d 1143 (1984)

Thomas HANKEY, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 84-162, 84-203.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

October 18, 1984.
Rehearing Denied November 20, 1984.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and David A. Henson, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Mark C. Menser, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

ORFINGER, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence wherein the trial court departed from the sentencing guidelines. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701.

There was no error in departing from the suggested guideline sentence, because of the articulated reason that the crime imposed a severe and long lasting economic and emotional hardship on the victim. The trial court found that the emotional trauma to the victim was as severe as if inflicted with "fists or sticks or guns or knives," and we find this to be a clear and convincing reason for departure. Therefore, no abuse of the judge's sentencing discretion has been demonstrated. Higgs v. State, 455 So.2d 451 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). See also, Green v. State, 455 So.2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

Appellant contends also that "even if the court's reasons for departure would legitimately support some guideline departure ... those reasons hardly justify its `leap' of six (6) guideline categories, i.e., from `any non-state prison sanction' to ten (10) years *1144 imprisonment without parole." Appellant entered a negotiated plea in consolidated cases to one count of burglary of a dwelling, a second degree felony under section 810.02(3), Florida Statutes (1983) and one count of burglary of a structure, a third degree felony under the same statute. He was sentenced to consecutive terms of five years on each count.

The sentences are within the limits imposed by statute for the respective crimes, Section 775.082(3)(c) and (d), Florida Statutes (1983), and are therefore proper. Once clear and convincing reasons exist which cause the sentencing court to depart from the guidelines, the court may impose any sentence otherwise authorized by law. Section 921.001(5), Florida Statutes (1983).

AFFIRMED.

FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., J., concurs.

SHARP, J., concurs in result only.

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

Related

Lipscomb v. State
573 So. 2d 429 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Hankey v. State
529 So. 2d 736 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Hankey v. State
485 So. 2d 827 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
Francis v. State
475 So. 2d 1366 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Lerma v. State
476 So. 2d 275 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Keys v. State
473 So. 2d 800 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Moore v. State
468 So. 2d 1081 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Harris v. State
465 So. 2d 545 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Deer v. State
462 So. 2d 96 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
MacFarland v. State
462 So. 2d 496 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Johnson v. State
462 So. 2d 49 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Miller v. State
459 So. 2d 495 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
458 So. 2d 1143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hankey-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.