Rangel v. State
This text of 532 So. 2d 84 (Rangel v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The state concedes, and we agree, that the trial court erred in imposing a sentence in excess of the guidelines without providing written reasons. State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985); e.g., Foster v. State, 491 So.2d 328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). We therefore vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing within the guidelines. Dougfield v. State, 529 So.2d 823 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Contra Waldron v. State, 529 So.2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (en banc). See also Brumley v. State, 520 So.2d 275 (Fla.1988); Shull v. Dugger, 515 So.2d 748 (Fla.1987); Harris v. State, 520 So.2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).
VACATED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
532 So. 2d 84, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2346, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4606, 1988 WL 107069, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rangel-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.