Hope v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hope v. State

562 So. 2d 863, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 4670, 1990 WL 89760

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 26, 1990

DocketNo. 89-2342

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 562 So. 2d 863 (Hope 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

Hope v. State, 562 So. 2d 863, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 4670, 1990 WL 89760 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Appellant seeks review of a judgment of conviction and sentence by which he was sentenced as a youthful offender after conviction in an adult court. The record reflects that the trial court did not comply with section 39.111(7)(d), Florida Statutes, which requires a written record of the trial court’s decision to impose adult sanctions against a juvenile. We cannot determine from the record whether the trial court considered each of the six criteria enumerated in section 39.111(7)(c) in determinin'g the suitability of adult sanctions against appellant. Therefore, we reverse and remand for resentencing in compliance with the statute. Martin v. State, 547 So.2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

ERVIN and MINER, JJ., concur.

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

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Appellant seeks review of a judgment of conviction and sentence by which he was sentenced as a youthful offender after conviction in an adult court. The record reflects that the trial court did not comply with section 39.111(7)(d), Florida Statutes, which requires a written record of the trial court’s decision to impose adult sanctions against a juvenile. We cannot determine from the record whether the trial court considered each of the six criteria enumerated in section 39.111(7)(c) in determinin'g the suitability of adult sanctions against appellant. Therefore, we reverse and remand for resentencing in compliance with the statute. Martin v. State, 547 So.2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

ERVIN and MINER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

562 So. 2d 863, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 4670, 1990 WL 89760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hope-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack