Spikes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Spikes v. State

570 So. 2d 1132, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9444, 1990 WL 205355

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 11, 1990

DocketNo. 89-2876

StatusPublished

This text of 570 So. 2d 1132 (Spikes 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

Spikes v. State, 570 So. 2d 1132, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9444, 1990 WL 205355 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, Judge.

We affirm appellant’s convictions for first degree murder and first degree arson. However, the state concedes the trial court gave a departure sentence for the arson conviction without a sentencing guidelines scoresheet and without giving written reasons for the departure. The trial court was mistakenly advised by the state and thus assumed that because appellant was being sentenced simultaneously for a capital offense, that it was not bound by the guidelines for either offense. Accordingly, the cause must be remanded to the trial court for resentencing on the arson conviction. Upon remand, the trial court may again impose a departure sentence for the arson conviction, provided written reasons are given for the departure. Cf. Roberts v. State, 547 So.2d 129, 131 (Fla.1989).

REVERSED and REMANDED for re-sentencing.

NIMMONS and ZEHMER, JJ„ concur.

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

SMITH, Judge.

We affirm appellant’s convictions for first degree murder and first degree arson. However, the state concedes the trial court gave a departure sentence for the arson conviction without a sentencing guidelines scoresheet and without giving written reasons for the departure. The trial court was mistakenly advised by the state and thus assumed that because appellant was being sentenced simultaneously for a capital offense, that it was not bound by the guidelines for either offense. Accordingly, the cause must be remanded to the trial court for resentencing on the arson conviction. Upon remand, the trial court may again impose a departure sentence for the arson conviction, provided written reasons are given for the departure. Cf. Roberts v. State, 547 So.2d 129, 131 (Fla.1989).

REVERSED and REMANDED for re-sentencing.

NIMMONS and ZEHMER, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

570 So. 2d 1132, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9444, 1990 WL 205355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spikes-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack