Rhone v. State
529 So. 2d 372, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1935, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3680, 1988 WL 84053
Opinion
We affirm upon authority of Franklin v. State, 526 So.2d 159 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), and Mulder v. State, 356 So.2d 870 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). As was done in Franklin, we certify the following question to be of great public importance:
HAVING SENTENCED A DEFENDANT TO A TERM OF INCARCERATION FOLLOWED BY PROBATION OR COMMUNITY CONTROL, MAY THE COURT AFTER A VIOLATION OF THE PROBATION OR COMMUNITY CONTROL, IMPOSE ANY SENTENCE WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN ORIGINALLY IMPOSED WITH CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED AND MUST SUCH SENTENCE BE WITHIN THE GUIDELINE RANGE UNLESS VALID REASONS FOR DEPARTURE ARE GIVEN?
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rhone v. State, 529 So. 2d 372, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1935, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3680, 1988 WL 84053 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).
529 So. 2d 372 (Rhone v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Franklin v. State
526 So. 2d 159 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Mulder v. State
356 So. 2d 870 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)