Foister v. State, BM-309

Decision Date29 July 1987
Docket NumberNo. BM-309,BM-309
Citation12 Fla. L. Weekly 1826,510 So.2d 371
Parties12 Fla. L. Weekly 1826 Richard FOISTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County; G. Robert Barron, judge.

David A. Davis, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and John W. Tiedmann, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

FRANK, Associate Judge.

Richard Foister appeals from the departure sentence imposed by the trial court pursuant to his plea of nolo contendere to two counts of lewd and lascivious assault. The presumptive sentence was five years. The trial court, however, departed and sentenced him to ten years incarceration.

Foister correctly asserts and the state concedes that the reasons for departure relied upon by the trial court are inappropriate. See, Powell v. State, 495 So.2d 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Nonetheless, the state contends the trial court should be allowed upon remand once again to depart. We disagree. When each "reason" stated by the trial court in support of departure is determined to be invalid, resentencing following remand is to occur within the guidelines. Williams v. State, 492 So.2d 1308 (Fla.1986).

Reversed and remanded for resentencing consistent with this opinion.

ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Hall v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 5 Agosto 1987
    ...for departure is found invalid by the appellate court, resentencing on remand must be within the guidelines. See also Foister v. State, 510 So.2d 371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). We view that holding to be inapplicable to this case because the sole reason for departure stated by the trial court had......
  • Spear v. Spear, 87-1525
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 29 Julio 1987
  • Freer v. State, BP-459
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 15 Octubre 1987
    ...have been determined not clear and convincing, sentencing on remand shall be within the sentencing guidelines range. Foister v. State, 510 So.2d 371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Williams v. State, 492 So.2d 1308 (Fla.1986). SHIVERS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur. 1 Phyllis Hall did not testify at the fi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT