State v. BELLUSCIO

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. BELLUSCIO

82 So. 3d 910, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10186, 2011 WL 2555457

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 29, 2011

Docket4D10-1108

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 82 So. 3d 910 (State v. BELLUSCIO) 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

State v. BELLUSCIO, 82 So. 3d 910, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10186, 2011 WL 2555457 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no error in the trial court’s imposition of a downward departure sentence, because the defendant met his burden of proving the requirements for a downward departure sentence, pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2009), and presented unrebutted testimony that the defendant required specialized treatment for mental health disorders unrelated to substance abuse, which was not available at the Department of Corrections.

Affirmed.

STEVENSON, TAYLOR and GERBER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find no error in the trial court’s imposition of a downward departure sentence, because the defendant met his burden of proving the requirements for a downward departure sentence, pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2009), and presented unrebutted testimony that the defendant required specialized treatment for mental health disorders unrelated to substance abuse, which was not available at the Department of Corrections.

Affirmed.

STEVENSON, TAYLOR and GERBER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 So. 3d 910, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10186, 2011 WL 2555457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-belluscio-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack