Shull v. State
This text of 481 So. 2d 1294 (Shull 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
John Garland SHULL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Michael E. Allen, Public Defender; and Paula S. Saunders, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Gregory G. Costas, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
We find no error in the trial judge considering habitual offender status as a reason for departure under the guidelines. Payne v. State, 480 So.2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (on motion for rehearing). However, we remand to the trial judge to provide written reasons in compliance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(11), even though the trial judge made written findings in the order of sentencing as a habitual felony offender. Cuthbert v. State, 459 So.2d 1098, 1100, n. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); see also State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 1985).
ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., and McCORD, GUYTE P., Jr. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
481 So. 2d 1294, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shull-v-state-fladistctapp-1986.