Merakian v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Merakian v. State

550 So. 2d 551, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2517, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6014, 1989 WL 126645

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 25, 1989·No. No. 89-00164·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of a guidelines sentence he received for an offense committed prior to the effective date of the guidelines. We affirm the sentence, because appellant did not affirmatively elect to be sentenced under the guidelines and the sentence imposed was less than the applicable statutory maximum. We remand, however, for amendment of the sentencing order to reflect that appellant was not sentenced under the guidelines and retains his parole rights. See Norton v. State, 521 So.2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

CAMPBELL, C.J., and RYDER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of a guidelines sentence he received for an offense committed prior to the effective date of the guidelines. We affirm the sentence, because appellant did not affirmatively elect to be sentenced under the guidelines and the sentence imposed was less than the applicable statutory maximum. We remand, however, for amendment of the sentencing order to reflect that appellant was not sentenced under the guidelines and retains his parole rights. See Norton v. State, 521 So.2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

CAMPBELL, C.J., and RYDER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Merakian v. State, 550 So. 2d 551, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2517, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6014, 1989 WL 126645 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

550 So. 2d 551 (Merakian v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related