State v. Roman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Roman

634 So. 2d 291, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3060, 1994 WL 106198

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 31, 1994

DocketNo. 92-3626

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 634 So. 2d 291 (State v. Roman) 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. Roman, 634 So. 2d 291, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3060, 1994 WL 106198 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

When Mike Roman was originally sentenced, written reasons were stated for departure from the sentencing guidelines, as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(ll). The State agreed to downward departure, and Roman was placed on community control. He subsequently violated the terms and conditions of community control. However, as in State v. Nickerson, 541 So.2d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), when imposing sentence after revoking community control, the court below did not provide a contemporaneous, written reason for a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines. We, therefore, REVERSE Roman’s sentence and REMAND for resentencing within the guidelines. See Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990); Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla.1990).

BARFIELD, WOLF and BENTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

When Mike Roman was originally sentenced, written reasons were stated for departure from the sentencing guidelines, as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(ll). The State agreed to downward departure, and Roman was placed on community control. He subsequently violated the terms and conditions of community control. However, as in State v. Nickerson, 541 So.2d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), when imposing sentence after revoking community control, the court below did not provide a contemporaneous, written reason for a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines. We, therefore, REVERSE Roman’s sentence and REMAND for resentencing within the guidelines. See Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990); Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla.1990).

BARFIELD, WOLF and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

634 So. 2d 291, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3060, 1994 WL 106198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-roman-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack