Burns v. State, s. 86-615--86-619
| Decision Date | 26 August 1987 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 86-615--86-619,s. 86-615--86-619 |
| Citation | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2089,513 So.2d 165 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2089 Thomas D. BURNS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Kevin Briggs, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Davis G. Anderson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Thomas D. Burns appeals his sentence and the condition of probation prohibiting him from visiting bars.
Burns entered a guilty plea to a number of charges of obtaining property in return for worthless checks and pled no contest to a charge of grand theft. On the grand theft charge, the court imposed a sentence of three years in prison to be suspended after eighteen months. On the worthless check charges, the trial court placed Burns on probation for five years on each charge to run concurrent with each other and with the grand theft charge.
Burns raises three points on appeal. He first argues that the trial court erred in exceeding the guidelines recommended range of any nonstate prison sentence without providing clear and convincing reasons. The court gave the following reasons for departure:
1. Lack of remorse--Lack of remorse is not a valid reason for departure. Johnson v. State, 503 So.2d 955 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Washington v. State, 501 So.2d 133 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Moreover, the facts here do not support the court's finding of lack of remorse. When asked why he had failed to make restitution to the victim, Burns responded that he felt it would not have made any difference. It appears that Burns was referring to the fact that charges had already been filed against him and that restitution would not have changed this. The court seems to have interpreted this response as lack of remorse. In the absence of any other clear evidence of lack of remorse, we do not believe this statement, given the context in which it was made, constitutes evidence of lack of remorse.
2. Failure to make restitution--Failure to make restitution is not a valid ground upon which to base a departure where the defendant has not yet been ordered to make restitution. Carney v. State, 458 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
3. Breach of trust--Breach of trust placed in Burns as an attorney is a valid reason for departure. See Hankey v. State, 485 So.2d 827 (Fla.1986); Jakubowski v. State, 494 So.2d 277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).
Based on the foregoing analysis, we conclude that there are one valid and two invalid reasons for departure; therefore, pursuant to Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla.1985), we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. See also Griffis v. State, 509 So.2d 1104 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
Next, Burns alleges that the trial court erred in sentencing without a sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The record does not contain a guidelines scoresheet; however, the colloquy...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clifton v. State, 89-02149
...informed as to the presumptive guidelines sentence, the absence of a scoresheet was irrelevant or harmless). See also Burns v. State, 513 So.2d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). The record of the appellant's sentencing hearing reveals that the trial court was not at all certain as to the correct pres......
-
Jacobsen v. State, 88-514
...objection to the imposition of that condition at the hearing prohibits him from raising the challenge now. Burns v. State, 513 So.2d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); McPike v. State, 473 So.2d 291 (Fla. 2d DCA Jacobsen finally maintains, and we agree, that it is incumbent upon the state to establish......
-
Stermer v. State, 88-963
...of opinions that a defendant's lack of remorse may not be relied upon to enlarge a guidelines sentence. See, e.g., Burns v. State, 513 So.2d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). The ultimate, but delayed, written reason for sentencing Stermer beyond the presumptive range was no less invalid than those u......