Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Keys v. State

Keys v. State

473 So. 2d 800, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1900
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 8, 1985
Docket85-30
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 473 So. 2d 800 (Keys 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
Keys v. State, 473 So. 2d 800, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1900 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

473 So.2d 800 (1985)

Johnny Lee KEYS, Jr., Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 85-30.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

August 8, 1985.

*801 James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and James R. Wulchak, Asst. Public Defender, Chief, Appellate Div., and Kenneth Witts, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sean Daly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

FRANK D. UPCHURCH, JR., Judge.

Keys appeals his convictions and sentences for sexual battery, robbery, and aggravated battery. We find that the reasons set out by the trial judge — Keys' violation of probation, his escalating course of violent criminal conduct indicating that he is unsuitable for probation or community control and the facts and circumstances relating to the present offenses — provide clear and convincing reasons supporting departure from the guidelines. See, e.g., Deer v. State, 462 So.2d 96 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review granted, Supreme Court No. 66,532; Murphy v. State, 459 So.2d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Hankey v. State, 458 So.2d 1143 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review granted, Supreme Court No. 66,320; Burke v. State, 456 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review granted, Supreme Court No. 66,091; Hendrix v. State, 455 So.2d 449 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review granted, 475 So.2d 1218, Supreme Court No. 65,928. Any reference by the trial judge to impermissible reasons for departure from the guidelines does not vitiate these valid reasons. Ragan v. State, 468 So.2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Albritton v. State, 458 So.2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review granted, Supreme Court No. 66,169. However, we do agree with Keys' contention that the trial judge erred in retaining jurisdiction over his sentences. See Ragan v. State; Emory v. State, 463 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Accordingly, we strike the retention of jurisdiction provisions of the sentences, but affirm the judgments and sentences in all other respects.

COBB, C.J., and ORFINGER, J., concur.

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

Related

Lipscomb v. State
573 So. 2d 429 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Kelly v. State
552 So. 2d 1140 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Keys v. State
504 So. 2d 54 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Keys v. State
500 So. 2d 134 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
Roseman v. State
497 So. 2d 986 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Pittman v. State
492 So. 2d 741 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Roberge v. State
484 So. 2d 82 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Davis v. State
486 So. 2d 8 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Moore v. State
483 So. 2d 37 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
473 So. 2d 800, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1900, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keys-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.