Thompkin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Thompkin v. State

573 So. 2d 451, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 816, 1991 WL 11653

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 6, 1991

DocketNo. 90-0489

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 573 So. 2d 451 (Thompkin v. State) 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

Thompkin v. State, 573 So. 2d 451, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 816, 1991 WL 11653 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction but reverse his sentence and remand for resen-tencing. The trial court’s order pursuant to section 39.111(7), Florida Statutes (1989) was deficient in addressing all of the statutory criteria. In particular, with respect to criterion 4, addressing the juvenile’s sophistication and maturity, the sole reference to past criminal behavior without addressing the other statutory criteria listed in section 39.111(7)(c)4 is inadequate. Flowers v. State, 546 So.2d 782 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Posey v. State, 501 So.2d 192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). See also Martin v. State, 547 So.2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

We also reverse the imposition of costs and remand for a determination of ability to pay. Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla.1988) and Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). However, we certify the same question certified in Beasley v. State, 565 So.2d 721 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).

DELL and WARNER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., (Retired) Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction but reverse his sentence and remand for resen-tencing. The trial court’s order pursuant to section 39.111(7), Florida Statutes (1989) was deficient in addressing all of the statutory criteria. In particular, with respect to criterion 4, addressing the juvenile’s sophistication and maturity, the sole reference to past criminal behavior without addressing the other statutory criteria listed in section 39.111(7)(c)4 is inadequate. Flowers v. State, 546 So.2d 782 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Posey v. State, 501 So.2d 192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). See also Martin v. State, 547 So.2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

We also reverse the imposition of costs and remand for a determination of ability to pay. Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla.1988) and Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). However, we certify the same question certified in Beasley v. State, 565 So.2d 721 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).

DELL and WARNER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., (Retired) Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

573 So. 2d 451, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 816, 1991 WL 11653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompkin-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack