Jennings v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jennings v. State

528 So. 2d 1289, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1781, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3401, 1988 WL 76417

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 28, 1988

DocketNo. 87-1932

StatusPublished

This text of 528 So. 2d 1289 (Jennings 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

Jennings v. State, 528 So. 2d 1289, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1781, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3401, 1988 WL 76417 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

DANIEL, Judge.

The defendant, David Jennings, appeals his convictions and sentences for two counts of sexual battery (counts 1 and 2) in violation of section 800.04(2), Florida Statutes (1985) and attempted sexual battery (count 3) in violation of sections 800.04(2) and 777.04, Florida Statutes (1985). The defendant’s recommended guidelines sentence was seven to nine years incarceration. The defendant was sentenced to concurrent split sentences of fifteen years on the sexual batteries, with six years suspended after serving nine years in prison, and five years imprisonment on the attempted sexual battery, to be served concurrently to the other sentences.

On appeal, the defendant argues that his sentences for the sexual batteries were improper because if he violates his probation, he will be subject to fifteen years incarceration, thereby constituting departure sentences. This argument is without merit. See McKee v. State, 528 So.2d 417 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).

The defendant also argues that on the written judgment, the trial court incorrectly designated the sexual batteries as first-degree felonies when they are second degree felonies and the attempted sexual battery as a second degree felony when it is a third degree felony. The defendant is correct. See sections 800.04(2) and 777.-04(4)(c). Accordingly, the case is remanded for correction of the judgment.¹

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

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

DANIEL, Judge.

The defendant, David Jennings, appeals his convictions and sentences for two counts of sexual battery (counts 1 and 2) in violation of section 800.04(2), Florida Statutes (1985) and attempted sexual battery (count 3) in violation of sections 800.04(2) and 777.04, Florida Statutes (1985). The defendant’s recommended guidelines sentence was seven to nine years incarceration. The defendant was sentenced to concurrent split sentences of fifteen years on the sexual batteries, with six years suspended after serving nine years in prison, and five years imprisonment on the attempted sexual battery, to be served concurrently to the other sentences.

On appeal, the defendant argues that his sentences for the sexual batteries were improper because if he violates his probation, he will be subject to fifteen years incarceration, thereby constituting departure sentences. This argument is without merit. See McKee v. State, 528 So.2d 417 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).

The defendant also argues that on the written judgment, the trial court incorrectly designated the sexual batteries as first-degree felonies when they are second degree felonies and the attempted sexual battery as a second degree felony when it is a third degree felony. The defendant is correct. See sections 800.04(2) and 777.-04(4)(c). Accordingly, the case is remanded for correction of the judgment.¹

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

528 So. 2d 1289, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1781, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3401, 1988 WL 76417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jennings-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack