Jory v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jory v. State

596 So. 2d 1126, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2284, 1992 WL 45046

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 13, 1992

DocketNo. 91-334

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 596 So. 2d 1126 (Jory 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

Jory v. State, 596 So. 2d 1126, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2284, 1992 WL 45046 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Victor Raymond Jory was convicted of ten counts of lewd and lascivious assault on a child,¹ one count of promoting a sexual performance by a child,² and one count of using a child in a sexual performance.³ We affirm the convictions, but reverse the sentences for each of the counts.

Although the able trial judge sentenced Jory in accordance with the law at that time, the Florida Supreme Court has since decided Flowers v. State, 586 So.2d 1058 (Fla.1991) (addressing legal constraint points) and Karchesky v. State, 591 So.2d 930 (Fla.1992) (addressing victim injury points). Accordingly, we reverse Jory’s sentences and remand this cause for resen-tencing in accordance with Flowers and Karchesky.

Convictions AFFIRMED; sentences REVERSED; and REMANDED for resen-tencing.

GOSHORN, C.J., and COBB and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Victor Raymond Jory was convicted of ten counts of lewd and lascivious assault on a child,¹ one count of promoting a sexual performance by a child,² and one count of using a child in a sexual performance.³ We affirm the convictions, but reverse the sentences for each of the counts.

Although the able trial judge sentenced Jory in accordance with the law at that time, the Florida Supreme Court has since decided Flowers v. State, 586 So.2d 1058 (Fla.1991) (addressing legal constraint points) and Karchesky v. State, 591 So.2d 930 (Fla.1992) (addressing victim injury points). Accordingly, we reverse Jory’s sentences and remand this cause for resen-tencing in accordance with Flowers and Karchesky.

Convictions AFFIRMED; sentences REVERSED; and REMANDED for resen-tencing.

GOSHORN, C.J., and COBB and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

596 So. 2d 1126, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2284, 1992 WL 45046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jory-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack