Messam v. State

640 So. 2d 162, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7509, 1994 WL 391047
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 29, 1994·No. No. 93-1913·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

W. SHARP, Judge.

We affirm Messam’s convictions, but vacate the sentences he received as an adult. The trial judge entered a written order which explained in a conclusory way, why the judge thought Messam should be sentenced as an adult, rather than as a juvenile. The order is a printed form, on which the judge has penned his initials and made checkmarks in some blanks. The judge made no individualized findings relating to Messam, these crimes, or Messam’s prior record, although during the sentencing hearing the judge orally stated adequate findings to support his decision.

The form findings entered m this case are legally insufficient to comply with the statutory mandate of section 39.059(7)(e), Florida Statutes (1991), as defined in Troutman v. State, 630 So.2d 528 (Fla.1993). See also McCoy v. State, 632 So.2d 181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). We have no alternative but to vacate the sentence and remand this case for resen-tencing. On remand, the trial judge may impose adult sanctions after making the individualized written findings required by the statute.

[163]*163AFFIRM in part; VACATE SENTENCES; REMAND.

DAUKSCH and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

Messam v. State, 640 So. 2d 162, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7509, 1994 WL 391047 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

640 So. 2d 162 (Messam v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Street v. State
665 So. 2d 359 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Frattallone v. State
658 So. 2d 1130 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Satalino v. State
652 So. 2d 1231 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)