State v. Valrio

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Valrio

678 So. 2d 452, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8345, 1996 WL 447446

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 9, 1996

DocketNo. 95-2816

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 678 So. 2d 452 (State v. Valrio) 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. Valrio, 678 So. 2d 452, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8345, 1996 WL 447446 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

GRIFFIN, Judge.

The state appeals a downward departure sentence for an offense committed in 1992. The defendant, William Valrio, acknowledges that under the holdings of Jones v. State, 639 So.2d 28 (Fla.1994) and Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990),¹ the failure of the lower court to issue contemporaneous written reasons for a below guidelines departure sentence would require a reversal and remand for resentencing within the guidelines. Val-rio urges, however, that this court should certify to the Florida Supreme Court the same question certified by the First District Court of Appeal in the case of State v. Pease, 669 So.2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Based upon the cited cases, we can see no basis to do so. In line with controlling authority, the sentence is vacated and remanded for resen-tencing within the applicable sentencing guidelines.

SENTENCE VACATED and REMANDED.

THOMPSON, J., and PERRY, B., Associate Judge, concur.

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

GRIFFIN, Judge.

The state appeals a downward departure sentence for an offense committed in 1992. The defendant, William Valrio, acknowledges that under the holdings of Jones v. State, 639 So.2d 28 (Fla.1994) and Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990),¹ the failure of the lower court to issue contemporaneous written reasons for a below guidelines departure sentence would require a reversal and remand for resentencing within the guidelines. Val-rio urges, however, that this court should certify to the Florida Supreme Court the same question certified by the First District Court of Appeal in the case of State v. Pease, 669 So.2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Based upon the cited cases, we can see no basis to do so. In line with controlling authority, the sentence is vacated and remanded for resen-tencing within the applicable sentencing guidelines.

SENTENCE VACATED and REMANDED.

THOMPSON, J., and PERRY, B., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

678 So. 2d 452, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8345, 1996 WL 447446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-valrio-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack