McDowell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McDowell v. State

211 So. 3d 373, 2017 WL 899913, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3000

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 7, 2017·No. CASE NO. 1D16-3227·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges her fifteen-year prison sentence for DUI manslaughter. She argues that the trial court committed fundamental error in suggesting that her sentence may have been different had she cooperated and admitted guilt at an earlier stage of the case. The State appropriately concedes that Appellant is entitled to relief. Accordingly, we VACATE the sentence and REMAND with instructions for Appellant to be resentenced before a different judge. See Dumas v. State, 134 So.3d 1048, 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Ritter v. State, 885 So.2d 413, 414-15 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

MAKAR and WINSOR, JJ., and BROWN, JOHN T., ASSOCIATE JUDGE, CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges her fifteen-year prison sentence for DUI manslaughter. She argues that the trial court committed fundamental error in suggesting that her sentence may have been different had she cooperated and admitted guilt at an earlier stage of the case. The State appropriately concedes that Appellant is entitled to relief. Accordingly, we VACATE the sentence and REMAND with instructions for Appellant to be resentenced before a different judge. See Dumas v. State, 134 So.3d 1048, 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Ritter v. State, 885 So.2d 413, 414-15 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

MAKAR and WINSOR, JJ., and BROWN, JOHN T., ASSOCIATE JUDGE, CONCUR.

McDowell v. State, 211 So. 3d 373, 2017 WL 899913, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3000 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

211 So. 3d 373 (McDowell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related