Brown v. State, 88-641
Decision Date | 21 December 1988 |
Docket Number | No. 88-641,88-641 |
Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 161 Charlie BROWN, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Neal L. Betancourt of Rotchford & Betancourt, P.A., Jacksonville, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Bradford L. Thomas, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
On appeal of his sentence, Brown argues that the reasons given by the trial court for exceeding the guidelines were invalid. We believe that at least one of the reasons given is a valid basis for departure, and therefore we affirm.
Appellant was convicted of two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon and one count of threatening to discharge a dangerous device. Shortly before these offenses were committed, appellant was released from prison on an unrelated offense. His release was occasioned by the fact that his guilty plea was held to not have been intelligently made. In the instant case, the trial court departed from the guideline range of four and one-half to five and one-half years and instead sentenced appellant to two fifty year terms of imprisonment for the robbery counts, and fifteen years imprisonment for the count of threatening to discharge a dangerous device, all sentences to run concurrently.
In its written justification for the guidelines departure, the trial court listed four reasons: (1) appellant's flagrant disregard for the safety of bystanders, (2) recent release from prison demonstrating predisposition to criminal behavior, (3) lack of regard for the law and the judicial system demonstrated by the appellant's failure to comply with the conditions of his release on bond, and (4) premeditation. The third justification given, lack of regard for the judiciary and the law, is a permissible ground. Fry v. State, 497 So.2d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). See also, Santana v. State, 507 So.2d 680 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1987) ( ), and Fuller v. State, 488 So.2d 594 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1986) ( ). But see, Lee v. State, 486 So.2d 709 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) ( ); Weathers v. State, 508 So.2d 1332 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1987) ( ); Hendsbee v. State, 497 So.2d 718 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1986) ( ).
In the instant case, there is an adequate factual basis for this departure ground. The appellant's release from prison was under the condition that he not leave his father's residence except to go to work. The trial court held that the appellant's failure to abide by this condition while on bond coupled with the offenses committed...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Campbell v. State
...or factors found not to justify departure." See Ch. 87-110, § 2, Laws of Fla.; § 921.001(5), Fla.Stat. (1987); Brown v. State, 535 So.2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). In addition, the standard of proof necessary to support a departure from the recommended sentence has been changed to a preponder......
-
Williams v. State, 88-529
...DCA 1988); Dixon v. State, 513 So.2d 1378 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Scott v. State, 488 So.2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); but see Brown v. State, 535 So.2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); see also Williams v. State, 500 So.2d 501 (Fla.1986); Coleman v. State, 521 So.2d 265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), or unsupported......
-
Brown v. State
...John M. Koenig, Jr. and Charlie McCoy, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent. PER CURIAM. We have for review Brown v. State, 535 So.2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), based on express and direct conflict with Hendsbee v. State, 497 So.2d 718 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), and Lee v. State, 486 So.2d......
-
Brown v. State
...lack of regard for the law and the judiciary, to be a permissible ground and to be adequately supported by the record. Brown v. State, 535 So.2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). The supreme court reviewed our decision based on express and direct conflict with Hendsbee v. State, 497 So.2d 718 (Fla. ......