McNeal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McNeal v. State

567 So. 2d 47, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7388, 1990 WL 140279

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 26, 1990·No. No. 88-01539·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant contends, and the appellee agrees, that upon revocation of community control or probation, based upon a single violation, a trial court is limited under the sentencing guidelines to a one cell “bump-up.” Franklin v. State, 545 So.2d 851 (Fla.1989). Thus, the defendant’s sentence beyond the one cell “bump-up” was an unauthorized departure from the sentencing guidelines.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant contends, and the appellee agrees, that upon revocation of community control or probation, based upon a single violation, a trial court is limited under the sentencing guidelines to a one cell “bump-up.” Franklin v. State, 545 So.2d 851 (Fla.1989). Thus, the defendant’s sentence beyond the one cell “bump-up” was an unauthorized departure from the sentencing guidelines.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

McNeal v. State, 567 So. 2d 47, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7388, 1990 WL 140279 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

567 So. 2d 47 (McNeal v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related