Hendry v. State

460 So. 2d 589, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 35
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 21, 1984
Docket84-923
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 460 So. 2d 589 (Hendry 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
Hendry v. State, 460 So. 2d 589, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 35 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

460 So.2d 589 (1984)

Rodney James HENDRY, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 84-923.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

December 21, 1984.

Jerry Hill, Public Defender, and Paul C. Helm, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Karla J. Staker, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

OTT, Acting Chief Judge.

Appellant, pursuant to a negotiated plea, received concurrent terms of five years imprisonment in each of two cases, one for armed robbery and the other for robbery and grand theft. Because the sentencing guidelines scoresheet incorrectly included fourteen points for victim injury, we reverse.

Under the factual basis supporting the plea, it was specified that considerable injury, both physical and mental, was inflicted on the victim by either appellant or his partner or both.

This court has recently held that points for victim injury should not be assessed because victim injury does not constitute an element of the offense of armed robbery. See Toney v. State, 456 So.2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

Accordingly, victim injury points should not have been included in the scoresheet, because victim injury is not an element of the convicted offenses of robbery, armed robbery, or grand theft.

We reverse appellant's sentence and remand for resentencing. We further note that while points for victim injury may not be included on the guidelines scoresheet, physical or mental abuse of the victim may be cited as reason for departure from the guidelines. Green v. State, 455 So.2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

DANAHY and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Rumph v. State
544 So. 2d 1150 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Russell v. State
528 So. 2d 522 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Baker v. State
526 So. 2d 202 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Daniels v. State
524 So. 2d 1117 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Cridland v. State
522 So. 2d 538 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Hayes v. State
516 So. 2d 318 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Hansbrough v. State
509 So. 2d 1081 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1987)
Vega v. State
498 So. 2d 1294 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Ritts v. State
491 So. 2d 1252 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Tyner v. State
491 So. 2d 1228 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Wright v. State
487 So. 2d 1176 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Smith v. State
484 So. 2d 649 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Holloman v. State
482 So. 2d 431 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Borden v. State
479 So. 2d 823 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Parker v. State
478 So. 2d 823 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Benedict v. State
475 So. 2d 1000 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Thompson v. State
483 So. 2d 1 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Brown v. State
474 So. 2d 346 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
460 So. 2d 589, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hendry-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.