Logue v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Logue v. State

547 So. 2d 351, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1929, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4597, 1989 WL 90933

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 15, 1989

DocketNo. 89-1614

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 547 So. 2d 351 (Logue 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

Logue v. State, 547 So. 2d 351, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1929, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4597, 1989 WL 90933 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

FERGUSON, Judge.

Logue appeals an order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. We treat the motion as one brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 (illegal sentence).

The defendant’s guideline sentence for multiple burglary and grand theft convictions is twelve to seventeen years of imprisonment. After accepting guilty pleas to the offenses, the trial judge told the defendant that he would be sentenced to fifty-six years, which would be mitigated to twelve years if he returned for sentencing after a furlough. Because he failed to return on the scheduled date, the defendant is incarcerated under the fifty-six-year sentence.

We reverse on the authority of Williams v. State, 500 So.2d 501 (Fla.1986), which holds that a trial court cannot make failure to appear a basis for departure from the sentencing guidelines by simply conditioning acceptance of a guilty plea upon the defendant’s agreement to accept a departure if he fails to appear.¹ See also Quarterman v. State, 527 So.2d 1380 (Fla.1988) (where condition to appear is an integral part of a plea bargain, failure to appear may justify departure sentence).

Reversed and remanded with instructions to enter the appropriate guidelines sentence.

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

FERGUSON, Judge.

Logue appeals an order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. We treat the motion as one brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 (illegal sentence).

The defendant’s guideline sentence for multiple burglary and grand theft convictions is twelve to seventeen years of imprisonment. After accepting guilty pleas to the offenses, the trial judge told the defendant that he would be sentenced to fifty-six years, which would be mitigated to twelve years if he returned for sentencing after a furlough. Because he failed to return on the scheduled date, the defendant is incarcerated under the fifty-six-year sentence.

We reverse on the authority of Williams v. State, 500 So.2d 501 (Fla.1986), which holds that a trial court cannot make failure to appear a basis for departure from the sentencing guidelines by simply conditioning acceptance of a guilty plea upon the defendant’s agreement to accept a departure if he fails to appear.¹ See also Quarterman v. State, 527 So.2d 1380 (Fla.1988) (where condition to appear is an integral part of a plea bargain, failure to appear may justify departure sentence).

Reversed and remanded with instructions to enter the appropriate guidelines sentence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

547 So. 2d 351, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1929, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4597, 1989 WL 90933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/logue-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack