Wiggins v. State

559 So. 2d 262, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1825, 1990 WL 31534
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 22, 1990·No. No. 89-841·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

W. SHARP, Judge.

We affirm Wiggins' adjudication of guilt for attempted armed robbery.1 How[263] ever, we quash the sentence imposed after his probation was revoked because it exceeds the one-cell bump-up permitted, and no written departure reasons were given. Franklin v. State, 545 So.2d 851 (Fla.1989), and Lambert v. State, 545 So.2d 838 (Fla.1989).

The trial court may have thought it was not imposing a departure sentence because a recent guidelines amendment would have permitted a sentence of three and one-half years in prison. Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure Re: Sentencing Guidelines (Rules 3.701 & 3.988), 522 So.2d 374 (Fla.1988). However, the amendment took effect after the offenses in this case were committed. Thus, we remand for resentencing within the one-cell bump-up permitted range.

AFFIRMED in part; sentences QUASHED; REMANDED.

HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

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

Wiggins v. State, 559 So. 2d 262, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1825, 1990 WL 31534 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

559 So. 2d 262 (Wiggins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Furlow v. State
579 So. 2d 910 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1991)
Lape v. State
569 So. 2d 529 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Washington v. State
564 So. 2d 168 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)