Roux v. State

455 So. 2d 495
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 14, 1984
DocketAW-357
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 455 So. 2d 495 (Roux 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
Roux v. State, 455 So. 2d 495 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

455 So.2d 495 (1984)

Joseph ROUX, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. AW-357.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

August 14, 1984.
Rehearing Denied September 28, 1984.

*496 Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Richard A. Patterson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

SMITH, Judge.

The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in imposing sentences exceeding the range permitted under the sentencing guidelines without giving written reasons for the departure. Appellant was sentenced on two counts of robbery with a firearm. He received a sentence of four years' incarceration for each offense, followed by a period of probation of five years on one count and ten years' probation on the other, both sentences to run concurrently.

The state concedes error in that under rule 3.701(d)(12), In re Rules of Criminal Procedure (Sentencing Guidelines), 439 So.2d 848 (Fla. 1983), the total sentence "cannot exceed the total guideline sentence unless a written reason is given." We find the position of the appellant and the state to be correct. At the time appellant was sentenced (November 7, 1983), committee note (d)(12) provided, as a specific limitation on the permissible total length of a split sentence i.e., a combination of state prison and incarceration, that "the total sanction imposed cannot exceed the maximum guideline range" without giving written reasons for the departure.[1] 439 So.2d at 852. The maximum guideline range for each of appellant's offenses is four and one-half years. No reasons for departure were given.

Accordingly, the sentences appealed are reversed and the cause is remanded for resentencing.

WENTWORTH and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

NOTES

[1] The amended committee notes, which have been adopted as a part of the rules, now provide in pertinent part: "The total sanction (incarceration and probation) shall not exceed the terms provided by general law." The Florida Bar: Amendment to Rules of Criminal Procedure (3.701, 3.988 — Sentencing Guidelines), 451 So.2d 824 (Fla. 1984). According to the view previously expressed by this court, the amended rule cannot be applied retroactively to appellant. Jackson v. State, 454 So.2d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

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

Related

DiCicco v. State
545 So. 2d 904 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Dreyer v. State
532 So. 2d 733 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Glover v. State
474 So. 2d 886 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Richardson v. State
472 So. 2d 1278 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Holt v. State
472 So. 2d 551 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Dewberry v. State
472 So. 2d 792 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Boynton v. State
473 So. 2d 703 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Whiteman v. State
465 So. 2d 591 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Harris v. State
465 So. 2d 545 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
State v. Overton
464 So. 2d 607 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Wright v. State
467 So. 2d 322 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
State v. Williams
463 So. 2d 525 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Hodges v. State
460 So. 2d 555 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Millett v. State
460 So. 2d 489 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Coates v. State
458 So. 2d 1219 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Walker v. State
458 So. 2d 396 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Mischler v. State
458 So. 2d 37 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Fleming v. State
456 So. 2d 1300 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Garcia v. State
454 So. 2d 714 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
455 So. 2d 495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roux-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.