State v. Robinson

723 So. 2d 350, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 15893, 1998 WL 879498
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Robinson. Read the opinion of the Court — 756 So. 2d 249
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 18, 1998·No. No. 98-00870·Published

Opinion

BLUE, Judge.

The State appeals a downward departure sentence for a violation of community control. We reverse because the trial court’s reason for departure is not supported by the record.

The trial court announced that it was departing downward based on Antonio M. Robinson’s need for drug treatment. However, nothing in the record showed that Robinson was amenable to rehabilitation. “[Sjubstance abuse, standing alone, cannot justify a departure. There must also be a finding based upon competent substantial evidence that if the defendant’s sentence is reduced in order to permit treatment for the dependency, there is a reasonable possibility that such treatment will be successful.” Herrin v. State, 568 So.2d 920, 922 (Fla.1990). Because the trial court made no such finding in this case and, in fact, no evidence was presented to establish Robinson’s amenability to treatment, we reverse.

Robinson entered an open plea to the violations. Accordingly, on remand, the trial court shall impose a guidelines sentence unless Robinson is otherwise entitled to withdraw his plea. See State v. Licea, 707 So.2d 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

Reversed and remanded for resentencing.

CAMPBELL, AC.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., Concur.

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

State v. Robinson, 723 So. 2d 350, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 15893, 1998 WL 879498 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

723 So. 2d 350 (State v. Robinson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Herrin v. State
568 So. 2d 920 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
State v. Licea
707 So. 2d 1155 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)