Lang v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lang v. State

503 So. 2d 957, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 711, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12023

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 5, 1987

DocketNo. BL-370

StatusPublished

This text of 503 So. 2d 957 (Lang 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

Lang v. State, 503 So. 2d 957, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 711, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12023 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, Judge.

Appellant appeals his sentence, which departs from the sentencing guidelines, and the imposition of costs pursuant to section 27.3455, Florida Statutes (1985). Although the trial court’s reasons for departure were in narrative form, it is clear that the trial court departed for these two reasons: (1) appellant’s juvenile record which was not scored, and (2) the timing of appellant’s offenses. Both of these reasons are valid. Weems v. State, 469 So.2d 128 (Fla.1985); and Williams v. State, 484 So.2d 71 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). However, the imposition of costs is reversed since appellant was not given notice and an opportunity to object. Lawton v. State, 492 So.2d 404 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). See also Comer v. State, 502 So.2d 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), and Harris v. State, 498 So.2d 1371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).

REVERSED and REMANDED for re-, sentencing.

JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

SMITH, Judge.

Appellant appeals his sentence, which departs from the sentencing guidelines, and the imposition of costs pursuant to section 27.3455, Florida Statutes (1985). Although the trial court’s reasons for departure were in narrative form, it is clear that the trial court departed for these two reasons: (1) appellant’s juvenile record which was not scored, and (2) the timing of appellant’s offenses. Both of these reasons are valid. Weems v. State, 469 So.2d 128 (Fla.1985); and Williams v. State, 484 So.2d 71 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). However, the imposition of costs is reversed since appellant was not given notice and an opportunity to object. Lawton v. State, 492 So.2d 404 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). See also Comer v. State, 502 So.2d 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), and Harris v. State, 498 So.2d 1371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).

REVERSED and REMANDED for re-, sentencing.

JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

503 So. 2d 957, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 711, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12023, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lang-v-state-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack