Thompson v. State

557 So. 2d 60, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1202, 1990 WL 17416
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Thompson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 525 So. 2d 1011
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 27, 1990·No. No. 89-2020·Published

Opinion

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals from an extra-guidelines sentence imposed solely on the finding that Thompson was an habitual offender. As the state correctly concedes, the sentence was erroneous, both because the court failed to make an express determination that the defendant is a threat to the community as required by section 775.-084, Florida Statutes (1987), Davis v. State, 557 So.2d 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Donaldson v. State, 519 So.2d 737 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), and because the sentence was not accompanied by written reasons — apart from the insufficient ground of habitual offender status — which justify the departure. Davis v. State, 557 So.2d 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Watts v. State, 525 So.2d 992 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

Accordingly, the sentence is reversed and the cause is remanded for appropriate re-sentencing.

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

Thompson v. State, 557 So. 2d 60, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1202, 1990 WL 17416 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

557 So. 2d 60 (Thompson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Donaldson v. State
519 So. 2d 737 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Watts v. State
525 So. 2d 992 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Davis v. State
557 So. 2d 60 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)