Tisdale v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tisdale v. State

475 So. 2d 1331, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2230, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16014

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 26, 1985

DocketNo. 84-1787

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 475 So. 2d 1331 (Tisdale 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

Tisdale v. State, 475 So. 2d 1331, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2230, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16014 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

ORFINGER, Judge.

Defendant’s conviction for burglary of a dwelling committed on June 6, 1984, resulted in a recommended guidelines sentence of community control or 12 to 30 months’ incarceration. Defendant appeals the sentence of 30 months’ incarceration followed by five years’ probation, contending that the sentence exceeds that permitted by the guidelines in effect when the crime was committed. We agree.

. [2] When the crime was committed, the sentencing guidelines proscribed the imposition of a split sentence (a combination of state prison and probation supervision) beyond the maximum guideline range. Committee note to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(12). On July 1,1984, an amendment to the rule took effect which permits the imposition of a total sanction not exceeding the term provided by law. Although the amended rule was in effect at time of sentencing, it cannot be applied retroactively. Hurst v. State, 474 So.2d 280 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Joyce v. State, 466 So.2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). This was not a departure sentence, so we must vacate the sentence and remand to the trial court with directions to strike the term of [1332]*1332probation unless a valid reason for departure is stated.

Sentence VACATED and REMANDED.

COBB, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.

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

ORFINGER, Judge.

Defendant’s conviction for burglary of a dwelling committed on June 6, 1984, resulted in a recommended guidelines sentence of community control or 12 to 30 months’ incarceration. Defendant appeals the sentence of 30 months’ incarceration followed by five years’ probation, contending that the sentence exceeds that permitted by the guidelines in effect when the crime was committed. We agree.

. [2] When the crime was committed, the sentencing guidelines proscribed the imposition of a split sentence (a combination of state prison and probation supervision) beyond the maximum guideline range. Committee note to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(12). On July 1,1984, an amendment to the rule took effect which permits the imposition of a total sanction not exceeding the term provided by law. Although the amended rule was in effect at time of sentencing, it cannot be applied retroactively. Hurst v. State, 474 So.2d 280 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Joyce v. State, 466 So.2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). This was not a departure sentence, so we must vacate the sentence and remand to the trial court with directions to strike the term of [1332]*1332probation unless a valid reason for departure is stated.

Sentence VACATED and REMANDED.

COBB, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

475 So. 2d 1331, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2230, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16014, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tisdale-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack