Roberson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Roberson v. State

596 So. 2d 1250, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4434, 1992 WL 73496

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 15, 1992

DocketNo. 91-1054

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 596 So. 2d 1250 (Roberson 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.

Bluebook

Roberson v. State, 596 So. 2d 1250, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4434, 1992 WL 73496 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge.

Johnnie Roberson has appealed from his convictions and sentences for attempted second degree murder with a firearm and aggravated battery with a firearm. We have considered all of his contentions and have concluded that only one has merit. In sentencing the defendant to consecutive sentences of twenty and fifteen years, the trial judge exceeded the permitted range of seven to twenty-two years without stating written reasons for departure. We find no merit in the state’s argument that the judge did not know he was imposing a guidelines departure sentence. Therefore, upon remand the trial court must sentence the defendant to a term within the guidelines permitted range. Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990).

Accordingly, we affirm Roberson’s convictions but reverse the sentences and remand for resentencing within the guidelines.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and GARRETT, J., concur.

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

FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge.

Johnnie Roberson has appealed from his convictions and sentences for attempted second degree murder with a firearm and aggravated battery with a firearm. We have considered all of his contentions and have concluded that only one has merit. In sentencing the defendant to consecutive sentences of twenty and fifteen years, the trial judge exceeded the permitted range of seven to twenty-two years without stating written reasons for departure. We find no merit in the state’s argument that the judge did not know he was imposing a guidelines departure sentence. Therefore, upon remand the trial court must sentence the defendant to a term within the guidelines permitted range. Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990).

Accordingly, we affirm Roberson’s convictions but reverse the sentences and remand for resentencing within the guidelines.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and GARRETT, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

596 So. 2d 1250, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4434, 1992 WL 73496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberson-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack