Jones v. State, 4-86-0365
| Decision Date | 28 January 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 4-86-0365,4-86-0365 |
| Citation | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 378,501 So.2d 178 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 378 Stingray JONES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Jeffrey L. Anderson, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Jr., Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert L. Teitler, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Of the six issues which have been raised herein, only those which we find to have merit are addressed in this opinion, by which we reverse appellant's sentence and remand for resentencing.
The trial court gave the following reasons for departure from the guidelines:
1. The Defendant is an habitual offender pursuant to F.S. 775.084.
2. The Defendant lied to this Court when he was placed on probation as to his name, aliases, and prior record. The Defendant has made a career out of crime and when caught uses various names to escape responsibility.
3. The Defendant committed the instant offense only eight days after being released from his third separate prison commitment.
4. The Defendant committed three felonies and five misdemeanors after he was placed on probation for the instant offense.
The habitual offender statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1985), can no longer operate as an alternative to guidelines sentencing nor as a reason for departure. Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863 (Fla.1986). Cf. Winters v. State, 500 So.2d 303 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (). Accordingly, the trial court's first basis for departure has been eliminated.
The trial court's second basis for departure is also invalid. In effect, it punishes appellant for a crime (perjury) for which he has neither been charged nor convicted, in contravention of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(f). See Sloan v. State, 472 So.2d 488 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), quashed in part on other grounds, 491 So.2d 276 (Fla.1986); Beauvais v. State, 475 So.2d 1342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).
The trial court's third reason has been found to be a valid reason for departure. Nixon v. State, 494 So.2d 222 (Fla 1st DCA 1986) (). However, the fourth reason given, as presently worded, is not valid as it has already been calculated into appellant's guideline score. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fletcher v. State
...found perjury at trial to be a valid reason for departure. See Beauvais v. State, 475 So.2d 1342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Jones v. State, 501 So.2d 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). If perjury at trial is not a clear and convincing reason to depart, then attempted subornation of perjury at trial would ha......
-
Jones v. State, 87-1144
...812.014(1)(b), Florida Statutes. Appellant's original sentence was reversed and the case was remanded for resentencing. Jones v. State, 501 So.2d 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Upon resentencing, appellant was sentenced to ten years in prison, with credit for time served. The maximum statutory pe......
-
Bannerman v. State, 87-2628
...invalid. The invalid reasons for departure included findings that the defendant did not tell the truth at his trial, Jones v. State, 501 So.2d 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); that he has shown an utter disregard for society, McClure v. State, 513 So.2d 1119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); that he lacked remor......
-
Lee v. State, 4-86-2450
...within five years of a prior robbery conviction and within only a few months after appellant's release from prison, Jones v. State, 501 So.2d 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); appellant has been on probation twice and violated it twice, Adams v. State, 490 So.2d 53 (Fla.1986); and he has a continuin......