Lago v. State, No. 90-1334

• Court: Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM; COPE
• Citation: 582 So.2d 118
• Docket Number: No. 90-1334
• Decision Date: 02 July 1991
• Parties: Miguel LAGO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. 582 So.2d 118, 16 Fla. L. Week. D1747

Page 118

582 So.2d 118 Miguel LAGO, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 90-1334.
582 So.2d 118, 16 Fla. L. Week. D1747 District Court of Appeal of Florida,
Third District. July 2, 1991.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Maria Brea Lipinski, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Patricia Ann Ash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HUBBART, COPE, and GERSTEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Miguel Lago, appeals his sentences for robbery with a firearm, unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense, and grand theft. We affirm.

Appellant's sole contention on appeal is that the trial court erred in sentencing appellant to a term in excess of the sentencing guidelines. We find no error.

The trial court gave written contemporaneous reasons for appellant's departure sentence. At least three of the four given reasons were valid. See Brown v. State, 569 So.2d 1223 (Fla.1990); State v. Jones, 530 So.2d 53 (Fla.1988); Evans v. State, 528 So.2d 125 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Braggs v. State, 522 So.2d 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Keys v. State, 500 So.2d 134 (Fla.1986); see

Page 119

also Lipscomb v. State, 573 So.2d 429 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).

Affirmed.

HUBBART and GERSTEN, JJ., concur.

COPE, Judge (specially concurring).

I concur in the affirmance on the basis of the finding of an escalating, continuing and persistent pattern of criminal conduct, which is supported by the record. State v. Jones, 530 So.2d 53, 55 (Fla.1988); Williams v. State, 504 So.2d 392 (Fla.1987); Keys v. State, 500 So.2d 134 (Fla.1986).

The other three reasons advanced by the trial court are, in my view, either invalid or doubtful as independent grounds for departure. First, the trial court cited "lack of regard for judicial system & law." The Florida Supreme Court has held that "disrespect for the law, standing alone, is not sufficient to justify a departure sentence because it is an inherent component of every criminal offense." Brown v. State, 569 So.2d 1223, 1224 (Fla.1990).

Second, for the same reasons stated in Brown, "further rehabilitation is improbable" is invalid as an independent reason where, as here, that ground for departure is a reference to defendant's bad record. See Ruiz v. State, 516 So.2d 1057, 1058 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), review denied, 525 So.2d 880 (Fla.1988); accord Johnson v. State, 535 So.2d 651, 654 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Assuming the continuing validity of Braggs v. State, 522...