Wade v. State

513 So. 2d 1358, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2468, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10693
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 21, 1987·No. No. 86-878·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Geraldine Wade, seeks review of the trial court’s judgment and sentence. We affirm the judgment, but reverse the sentence imposed.

The trial court departed from the recommended guidelines range based solely upon the appellant’s classification as a habitual offender. Subsequent to the trial court’s imposition of sentence, the Florida Supreme Court held that a defendant’s habitual offender status is an improper reason to depart from the sentencing guidelines. See Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863 (Fla.1986).

We, accordingly, reverse the trial court’s sentence and remand for resentencing within the recommended guidelines range. We affirm in all other respects.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and FRANK, JJ., concur.

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

Wade v. State, 513 So. 2d 1358, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2468, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10693 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

513 So. 2d 1358 (Wade v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Reginald L. Bryant v. State of Florida
148 So. 3d 1251 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2014)
Patterson v. State
549 So. 2d 245 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Shull v. Dugger
515 So. 2d 748 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1987)