Milby v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Milby v. State

472 So. 2d 900, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1833, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14687

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 30, 1985·No. Nos. AZ-447, BE-264·Published

Opinion

BARFIELD, Judge.

Timothy Milby appeals two judgments and sentences for burglary and grand theft. He contends that after affirmatively electing to be sentenced under the guidelines he is entitled to be resentenced because he did not knowingly waive his right to parole. This issue has been determined contrary to appellant’s position in Moore v. State, 455 So.2d 535 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

Appellant next contends that there were not clear and convincing reasons for the trial court to depart from the sentence recommended under the guidelines. We find this contention to be without merit.

The judgments and sentences are AFFIRMED.

BOOTH, C.J., and WIGGINTON, J„ concur.

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

BARFIELD, Judge.

Timothy Milby appeals two judgments and sentences for burglary and grand theft. He contends that after affirmatively electing to be sentenced under the guidelines he is entitled to be resentenced because he did not knowingly waive his right to parole. This issue has been determined contrary to appellant’s position in Moore v. State, 455 So.2d 535 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

Appellant next contends that there were not clear and convincing reasons for the trial court to depart from the sentence recommended under the guidelines. We find this contention to be without merit.

The judgments and sentences are AFFIRMED.

BOOTH, C.J., and WIGGINTON, J„ concur.

Milby v. State, 472 So. 2d 900, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1833, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14687 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

472 So. 2d 900 (Milby v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related