Brooks v. State, BH-169
| Citation | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 933,487 So.2d 1142 |
| Decision Date | 22 April 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. BH-169,BH-169 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 933 Dan BROOKS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Michael Allen, Public Defender, Terry P. Lewis, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Patricia Conners, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Brooks appeals from an order departing from the sentencing guidelines. We affirm.
Brooks was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to 20 years. Upon appeal to this court of his sentence, Brooks' case was remanded for sentencing on the grounds that he did not affirmatively select guidelines sentencing, a proper scoresheet was not prepared, and the trial court's reasons for departing from the guidelines were in the form of a preprinted "laundry list" and not related to the points of the case. See, Brooks v. State, 466 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
On resentencing, Brooks was again sentenced to 20 years. The recommended guidelines sentence was for between three and one-half and four and one-half years. The trial judge set forth the following reason as justification for departure:
(1) The Defendant engaged in criminal conduct in such fashion as to expose many persons to risk of injury or death. The foregoing is not embraced within the sentencing guidelines as a scoring factor for calculation of guideline sentences and the Court considers such conduct to be so egregious as to warrant departure from the guidelines.
As his second reason, the judge gave: "Any other reasons articulated by this Court at the sentencing hearing." In this regard the court stated:
Secondly, the First District is one of the Districts that if you give more than one reason for departure and they then find one of those reasons is not sufficient, they remand for resentencing anyhow. So in the First District, I don't think it's prudent to give but one reason at a time. I have other reasons but at this time I don't see any reason to go into them because if they find any of those reasons are not sufficient, then it will come back for resentencing. So I will go one reason at a time. That's simply to avoid the necessity of doing the job over and over again. So I think any judge in the First District is well advised to only give one reason for departure. Once you make up your mind to depart from the sentencing guidelines, you then should arrive, I think, at a sentence you think the offense calls for and impose it, and that's what I have done in this case.
Before addressing Brooks' argument, this court would first like to consider the comment made by Judge Hall. We regard the comment as nothing more than a momentary lapse, or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hall v. State
...in a large store with a number of innocent customers where the potential injury to bystanders was great." Id. at 1060. In Brooks v. State, 487 So.2d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 497 So.2d 1217 (Fla.1986), in which the defendant was convicted of armed robbery of a grocery store, a co-pe......
-
Brooks v. State
...1217 497 So.2d 1217 Brooks (Dan) v. State NO. 68,961 Supreme Court of Florida. OCT 20, 1986 Appeal From: 1st DCA 487 So.2d 1142 Rev. ...