Ruiz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ruiz v. State

578 So. 2d 436, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3638, 1991 WL 60021

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 18, 1991

DocketNo. 90-00744

StatusPublished

This text of 578 So. 2d 436 (Ruiz 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

Ruiz v. State, 578 So. 2d 436, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3638, 1991 WL 60021 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from judgment and departure sentences following a jury trial for robbery with a firearm and kidnapping with a firearm. Appellant has raised two issues for our consideration, one of which requires discussion.

The trial court entered a departure sentence and found that:

[A] minor, 16 years of age, was involved with the defendant in the crimes for which he was convicted. On the facts presented at the trial and at sentencing, the Court further finds that the defendant exercised enough control and authority over the minor that the minor would not have been involved in the crimes except for the actions of the defendant.

This written reason is insufficient to support a departure sentence. Hallman v. State, 560 So.2d 223 (Fla.1990). Therefore, we must reverse appellant’s sentence. The [437]*437Florida Supreme Court has held that when all written reasons for departure are invalid, the trial court, on remand, must resen-tence appellant within the guidelines. Shull v. Dugger, 515 So.2d 748 (Fla.1987).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, reverse the sentence, and remand for resen-tencing within the guidelines.

BOOTH, ZEHMER and WOLF, JJ., concur.

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