Thrift v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Thrift v. State

581 So. 2d 655, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6501, 1991 WL 118238

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 5, 1991

DocketNo. 90-01971

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 581 So. 2d 655 (Thrift 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

Thrift v. State, 581 So. 2d 655, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6501, 1991 WL 118238 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the convictions and guideline departure sentence in this case pursuant to Williams v. State, 559 So.2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). As in Williams we certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question of great public importance:

HAS THE SUPREME COURT IN REE v. STATE, 565 So.2d 1329 (FLA.1990), AND LAMBERT v. STATE, 545 So.2d 838 (FLA.1989), RECEDED FROM THE HOLDING IN ADAMS v. STATE, 490 So.2d 53 (FLA.1986), IN WHICH IT FOUND THAT WHERE A DEFENDANT, PREVIOUSLY PLACED ON PROBATION, HAS REPEATEDLY VIOLATED THE TERMS OF HIS PROBATION AFTER HAVING HAD HIS PROBATION RESTORED, THAT A TRIAL [656]*656COURT MAY USE THE MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF PROBATION AS A VALID REASON TO SUPPORT A DEPARTURE SENTENCE BEYOND THE ONE-CELL BUMP FOR VIOLATION OF PROBATION UNDER RULE 3.701(d)(14), FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE?

SCHEB, A.C.J., and RYDER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the convictions and guideline departure sentence in this case pursuant to Williams v. State, 559 So.2d 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). As in Williams we certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question of great public importance:

HAS THE SUPREME COURT IN REE v. STATE, 565 So.2d 1329 (FLA.1990), AND LAMBERT v. STATE, 545 So.2d 838 (FLA.1989), RECEDED FROM THE HOLDING IN ADAMS v. STATE, 490 So.2d 53 (FLA.1986), IN WHICH IT FOUND THAT WHERE A DEFENDANT, PREVIOUSLY PLACED ON PROBATION, HAS REPEATEDLY VIOLATED THE TERMS OF HIS PROBATION AFTER HAVING HAD HIS PROBATION RESTORED, THAT A TRIAL [656]*656COURT MAY USE THE MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF PROBATION AS A VALID REASON TO SUPPORT A DEPARTURE SENTENCE BEYOND THE ONE-CELL BUMP FOR VIOLATION OF PROBATION UNDER RULE 3.701(d)(14), FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE?

SCHEB, A.C.J., and RYDER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 So. 2d 655, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6501, 1991 WL 118238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thrift-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack