Sardella v. State
This text of 526 So. 2d 918 (Sardella 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
We reverse Appellant’s sentence because the trial court’s reasons for departure are invalid. The trial court improperly departed from the recommended guidelines sentence based upon hearsay allegations, Cannada v. State, 472 So.2d 1296, 1299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); and upon Appellant’s breach of the public trust while Appellant was a public servant. Breach of public trust is an inherent component of the crime of Bribery by a Public Servant, Florida Statutes, § 838.015(1). Thus, the trial court’s reliance on that reason for departure is invalid. See State v. Cote, 487 So.2d 1039 (Fla.1986).
REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
526 So. 2d 918, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 828, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1186, 1988 WL 25458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sardella-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.