Zimmerman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Zimmerman v. State

554 So. 2d 670, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 64, 1990 WL 781

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 5, 1990·No. No. 89-00675·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the defendant’s sentence which was an upward departure from the presumptive guidelines sentence. The defendant’s negotiated plea agreement was a valid reason upon which to base a departure sentence. Smith v. State, 529 So.2d 1106 (Fla.1988).

Appellant also argues that the trial court erred in failing to rule upon his pro se motion for jail time credit. This motion may not have come to the court’s attention until after appellant had filed his notice of appeal. Accordingly, this opinion is without prejudice to appellant to renew the motion after our mandate has issued.

Affirmed.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the defendant’s sentence which was an upward departure from the presumptive guidelines sentence. The defendant’s negotiated plea agreement was a valid reason upon which to base a departure sentence. Smith v. State, 529 So.2d 1106 (Fla.1988).

Appellant also argues that the trial court erred in failing to rule upon his pro se motion for jail time credit. This motion may not have come to the court’s attention until after appellant had filed his notice of appeal. Accordingly, this opinion is without prejudice to appellant to renew the motion after our mandate has issued.

Affirmed.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

Zimmerman v. State, 554 So. 2d 670, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 64, 1990 WL 781 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

554 So. 2d 670 (Zimmerman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related