Watkins v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Watkins v. State

680 So. 2d 547, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7864, 1996 WL 413708

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 25, 1996

DocketNo. 95-3351

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 680 So. 2d 547 (Watkins 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

Watkins v. State, 680 So. 2d 547, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7864, 1996 WL 413708 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

ALLEN, Judge.

The appellant challenges a sentence imposed under the Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.702 sentencing guidelines. Relying on State v. Davis, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 1994), the appellant contends that the sentence of community control with a term of incarceration in the county jail is a guidelines [548]*548departure requiring written reasons. Although Davis involved an earlier version of the guidelines which authorized these sanctions only in the disjunctive, the rule 3.702 guidelines have been construed in the same manner. See Simmons v. State, 668 So.2d 654 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); see also Perry v. State, 673 So.2d 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). As in Simmons and Perry, we certify the following question:

IS THE RULE IN STATE v. DAVIS, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994), REQUIRING WRITTEN REASONS FOR DEPARTURE WHEN COMBINING NON-STATE PRISON SANCTIONS, APPLICABLE UNDER THE FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.702 SENTENCING GUIDELINES (1994)?

In light of Simmons, the appealed order is reversed and the case is remanded.

MINER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

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

ALLEN, Judge.

The appellant challenges a sentence imposed under the Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.702 sentencing guidelines. Relying on State v. Davis, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 1994), the appellant contends that the sentence of community control with a term of incarceration in the county jail is a guidelines [548]*548departure requiring written reasons. Although Davis involved an earlier version of the guidelines which authorized these sanctions only in the disjunctive, the rule 3.702 guidelines have been construed in the same manner. See Simmons v. State, 668 So.2d 654 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); see also Perry v. State, 673 So.2d 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). As in Simmons and Perry, we certify the following question:

IS THE RULE IN STATE v. DAVIS, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994), REQUIRING WRITTEN REASONS FOR DEPARTURE WHEN COMBINING NON-STATE PRISON SANCTIONS, APPLICABLE UNDER THE FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.702 SENTENCING GUIDELINES (1994)?

In light of Simmons, the appealed order is reversed and the case is remanded.

MINER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

680 So. 2d 547, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7864, 1996 WL 413708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watkins-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack