Limback v. State

590 So. 2d 1132, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 202, 1992 WL 278
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 3, 1992
DocketNo. 90-2032
StatusPublished

This text of 590 So. 2d 1132 (Limback 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
Limback v. State, 590 So. 2d 1132, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 202, 1992 WL 278 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

LETTS, Judge.

This is the second time this case has come before us. Limback v. State, 558 So.2d 542 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). On the first occasion, we reversed for failure to enunciate written reasons for sentencing departure. See Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla.1990). On this second occasion, we must reverse again. This time the court again departed and imposed the same sentence as before, but provided written reasons. However, our supreme court has decreed that such cannot be done. On remand, there is no possibility of departure from the guidelines. Robinson v. State, 571 So.2d 429 (Fla.1990).

REVERSED.

ANSTEAD, J., and FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Related

Robinson v. State
571 So. 2d 429 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
Ree v. State
565 So. 2d 1329 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
Limback v. State
558 So. 2d 542 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
590 So. 2d 1132, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 202, 1992 WL 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/limback-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.