Hardy v. State
586 So. 2d 1070, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 4598, 1991 WL 80916
Opinion
This cause is before us on appeal from a judgment and sentence for violation of probation. Appellant argues, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred in imposing a nine-cell upward departure sentence for violation of probation. Lambert v. State, 545 So.2d 838, 842 (Fla.1989); Sellers v. State, 563 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Teer v. State, 557 So.2d 910, [1071]*1071911 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). We therefore reverse the departure sentence and remand for resentencing with a permissible one-cell increase for probation violation.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hardy v. State, 586 So. 2d 1070, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 4598, 1991 WL 80916 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).
586 So. 2d 1070 (Hardy v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Teer v. State
557 So. 2d 910 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Lambert v. State
545 So. 2d 838 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)
Sellers v. State
563 So. 2d 214 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)