Huewitt v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Huewitt v. State

963 So. 2d 314, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 12730, 2007 WL 2317108

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 15, 2007·No. No. 4D07-2646·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion to correct illegal sentence. The record reflects that appellant committed the underlying offense after the October 1,1998 effective date of the Criminal Punishment Code (CPC). The CPC permits a court to sentence a criminal defendant up to the statutory maximum without the need for written reasons or a departure. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.704; § 921.0024(2), Fla. Stat. (1999); see also Moore v. State, 882 So.2d 977, 984 (Fla.2004). Thus, appellant could be sentenced up to the statutory maximum for his offense without an “upward departure.”

SHAHOOD, C.J., GUNTHER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion to correct illegal sentence. The record reflects that appellant committed the underlying offense after the October 1,1998 effective date of the Criminal Punishment Code (CPC). The CPC permits a court to sentence a criminal defendant up to the statutory maximum without the need for written reasons or a departure. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.704; § 921.0024(2), Fla. Stat. (1999); see also Moore v. State, 882 So.2d 977, 984 (Fla.2004). Thus, appellant could be sentenced up to the statutory maximum for his offense without an “upward departure.”

SHAHOOD, C.J., GUNTHER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Huewitt v. State, 963 So. 2d 314, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 12730, 2007 WL 2317108 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

963 So. 2d 314 (Huewitt v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related