Laster v. State

486 So. 2d 88, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 860
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 10, 1986
Docket85-1444
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 486 So. 2d 88 (Laster 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
Laster v. State, 486 So. 2d 88, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 860 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

486 So.2d 88 (1986)

James Lawrence LASTER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 85-1444.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

April 10, 1986.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Kenneth Witts, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joseph N. D'Achille, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence. Appellant was convicted of two crimes; sexual battery of a child under twelve years of age and lewd and lascivious assault upon a child.

Sexual battery on a child under twelve years of age is a capital felony punishable by life imprisonment with a minimum of twenty-five years imprisonment. It is not a life felony and is not subject to a guideline sentence; it is not scored within the guidelines. Rusaw v. State, 451 So.2d 469 (Fla. 1984); Brosz v. State, 466 So.2d 256 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).

The primary offense at sentencing, for guideline sentencing purposes, was the lewd assault. The points assessed for a prior offense of uttering a forged check should not have been added to the scoresheet because that crime was committed after the lewd assault and thus is not a prior offense. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(5)(a). It does not matter that appellant had been convicted and sentenced for uttering the forged check before the instant conviction and sentences. Although little, if any, difference in the sentence will result, we must remand for resentencing.

SENTENCE QUASHED; REMANDED.

UPCHURCH and COWART, JJ., concur.

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

Related

STEVEN PINDER v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2022
Morgan v. State
146 So. 3d 508 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Holton v. State
51 So. 3d 1164 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Yordan v. State
899 So. 2d 336 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Collins v. State
823 So. 2d 299 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
State v. Young
579 So. 2d 380 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Laster v. State
564 So. 2d 536 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Gore v. State
552 So. 2d 1185 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Norris v. State
503 So. 2d 911 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Dailey v. State
501 So. 2d 15 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
486 So. 2d 88, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laster-v-state-fladistctapp-1986.