LaFlamme v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

LaFlamme v. State

586 So. 2d 66, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6365, 1991 WL 110451

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 19, 1991

DocketNo. 89-02343

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 586 So. 2d 66 (LaFlamme 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

LaFlamme v. State, 586 So. 2d 66, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6365, 1991 WL 110451 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the defendant’s two convictions without discussion. We reverse his sentence on the lewd, lascivious, or indecent assault conviction because the trial court scored forty points for penetration under victim injury when it should have scored only twenty points for contact. See Daum v. State, 544 So.2d 1035 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 551 So.2d 462 (Fla.1989); O’Bright v. State, 508 So.2d 385 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). On remand, the trial court may reimpose the same sentence because, even with the twenty fewer points, the defendant’s total points will still fall within the same permitted range.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

HALL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and ALTENBERND, JJ. concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the defendant’s two convictions without discussion. We reverse his sentence on the lewd, lascivious, or indecent assault conviction because the trial court scored forty points for penetration under victim injury when it should have scored only twenty points for contact. See Daum v. State, 544 So.2d 1035 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 551 So.2d 462 (Fla.1989); O’Bright v. State, 508 So.2d 385 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). On remand, the trial court may reimpose the same sentence because, even with the twenty fewer points, the defendant’s total points will still fall within the same permitted range.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

HALL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and ALTENBERND, JJ. concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

586 So. 2d 66, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6365, 1991 WL 110451, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laflamme-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack