Racino v. State

479 So. 2d 816, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2734, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17244
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 11, 1985·No. No. 84-1865·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction for burglary and sexual battery, but reverse the sentences and remand for resentencing. The trial court stated three specific grounds for departure from the sentencing guidelines and several additional grounds appear in the body of the Order for Aggravation of Sentence. One of the stated grounds is invalid: “that the defendant perjured himself during his testimony.” The state has not shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the absence of this invalid reason would not have affected the departure sentence. Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla.1985). We remand for reconsideration of the sentence without taking into account the purported perjury.

HERSEY, C.J., and HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

Racino v. State, 479 So. 2d 816, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2734, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17244 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

479 So. 2d 816 (Racino v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. State
484 So. 2d 649 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
State v. Anderson
479 So. 2d 816 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)