State v. Kinsman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Kinsman

715 So. 2d 360, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 10403, 1998 WL 472863

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 14, 1998

DocketNo. 97-3303

StatusPublished

This text of 715 So. 2d 360 (State v. Kinsman) 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. Kinsman, 715 So. 2d 360, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 10403, 1998 WL 472863 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

COBB, Judge.

The state challenges the entry of a downward departure sentence by the trial court for the appellee, Kinsman, who had pled guilty to burglary and petit theft. The basis for the departure sentence, as stated by the trial court, was that Kinsman was addicted to alcohol and should receive treatment. The state contends that there was insufficient record evidence to support the court’s determination that Kinsman had a substance abuse problem at the time the offense was committed and, moreover, the trial court failed to make any finding that Kinsman was amenable to treatment. See State v. Hill, 698 So.2d 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).

We must agree with the state. The trial court based its decision upon a single prior DUI conviction in 1996 and Kinsman’s statement to the court that he was drinking at the time of the instant offenses. Kinsman never acknowledged being an alcoholic or stated that he was seeking treatment for addiction. As contended by the state, the trial court made no finding that Kinsman was amenable to treatment, and there was insufficient record evidence to support such a finding had it been made. See Herrin v. State, 568 So.2d 920 (Fla.1990) and State v. Traster, 610 So.2d 572 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF A GUIDELINE SENTENCE.

W. SHARP and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

COBB, Judge.

The state challenges the entry of a downward departure sentence by the trial court for the appellee, Kinsman, who had pled guilty to burglary and petit theft. The basis for the departure sentence, as stated by the trial court, was that Kinsman was addicted to alcohol and should receive treatment. The state contends that there was insufficient record evidence to support the court’s determination that Kinsman had a substance abuse problem at the time the offense was committed and, moreover, the trial court failed to make any finding that Kinsman was amenable to treatment. See State v. Hill, 698 So.2d 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).

We must agree with the state. The trial court based its decision upon a single prior DUI conviction in 1996 and Kinsman’s statement to the court that he was drinking at the time of the instant offenses. Kinsman never acknowledged being an alcoholic or stated that he was seeking treatment for addiction. As contended by the state, the trial court made no finding that Kinsman was amenable to treatment, and there was insufficient record evidence to support such a finding had it been made. See Herrin v. State, 568 So.2d 920 (Fla.1990) and State v. Traster, 610 So.2d 572 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF A GUIDELINE SENTENCE.

W. SHARP and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

715 So. 2d 360, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 10403, 1998 WL 472863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-kinsman-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack