State v. Howell

611 So. 2d 5, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12503, 1992 WL 362208
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 10, 1992·No. No. 91-1677·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The state challenges a downward departure sentence that was imposed without regard to the requirements of Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla.1990). Specifically, the trial court failed to issue contemporaneous written reasons when it sentenced appellee to community control and a term of probation; appellee’s guidelines scoresheet recommended 7 to 9 years in prison.1 We agree that the trial court’s delay necessitates a remand for resentencing with no possibility of departure from the guidelines. See Fraser v. State, 602 So.2d 1299 (Fla.1992); Owens v. State, 598 So.2d 64 (Fla.1992); Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990). However, appellee’s sentence must not exceed the statutory maximum. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)10. On remand, we alert the trial court to Fraser, supra, which allows credit for time served on community control.

The challenged sentence is vacated, and the cause remanded for resentencing.

SMITH, WIGGINTON and MINER, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

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

State v. Howell, 611 So. 2d 5, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12503, 1992 WL 362208 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

611 So. 2d 5 (State v. Howell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Schank
625 So. 2d 999 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)