Morganti v. State, 89-0053
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Writing for the Court | STONE; WALDEN; LETTS; LETTS |
| Citation | 557 So.2d 593 |
| Parties | 15 Fla. L. Weekly D204 Patrick Joseph MORGANTI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 89-0053,89-0053 |
| Decision Date | 17 January 1990 |
Page 593
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Fourth District.
Rehearing Denied March 29, 1990.
Page 594
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender and Marcy K. Allen, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Celia A. Terenzio, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
STONE, Judge.
This is a third appeal from sentences imposed following a violation of probation. The previously reversed sentences were for thirty and fifteen years incarceration. Morganti v. State, 498 So.2d 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), approved, 509 So.2d 929 (1987); Morganti v. State, 524 So.2d 641 (Fla.1988). Here, the sentence was a term of five and one-half years (5 1/2) in prison and a ten thousand dollar ($10,000) fine followed by eighteen (18) months additional probation. Appellant was also directed to pay the fine as a condition of probation. The presumptive guideline sentencing range is 5 1/2 to 7 years.
The appellant contests the imposition of a fine for the first time upon resentencing, contending that it constitutes an impermissible enhancement of his sentence. Kominsky v. State, 330 So.2d 800 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). He also contends that the trial court may not impose a term of probation over the defendant's objection. See Brown v. State, 305 So.2d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974); Dearth v. State, 390 So.2d 108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
The imposition of a fine for the first time upon a resentencing, where the defendant has rejected a previously imposed longer term of incarceration, does not constitute an abuse of discretion, nor is it an unconstitutional penalty, forbidden under North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 89 S.Ct. 2089, 23 L.Ed.2d 656 (1969). Cf. Johnson v. State, 502 So.2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). We also considered Lambert v. State, 545 So.2d 838 (Fla.1989) and Scott v. State, 550 So.2d 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) and deem them inapposite. We note that the record is silent as to why the fine was not initially imposed. However, it is not unreasonable to consider that this was related to the length of the initial terms of incarceration and the fact that the initial longer sentences were not coupled with a successive period of probation. Additionally, the imposition of the fine is not a deviation from the sentencing guidelines. Cf. Whiteman v. State, 465 So.2d 591...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Donovan v. State, No. 89-1810
...imposed for it and the lesser offenses it subsumed. See Baggett v. State, 302 So.2d 206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). 3 Compare Morganti v. State, 557 So.2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA DOUBLE JEOPARDY: RICO The issue here is whether the appellant engaged in more than one "pattern of racketeering activity" unde......
-
Causey v. State, No. 92-2188
...of the terms of a probation order. We note that chapter 948, Florida Statutes, contains no such provision. See also Morganti v. State, 557 So.2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), approved, 573 So.2d 820 We affirm as to the other issues raised. We find no error or abuse of discretion in the trial cou......
-
Morganti v. State, No. 75940
...Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent. OVERTON, Justice. Patrick Joseph Morganti seeks review of Morganti v. State, 557 So.2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal approved a resentencing which was within the sentencing guidelines, but which ......
-
Donovan v. State, 89-1810
...imposed for it and the lesser offenses it subsumed. See Baggett v. State, 302 So.2d 206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). 3 Compare Morganti v. State, 557 So.2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA DOUBLE JEOPARDY: RICO The issue here is whether the appellant engaged in more than one "pattern of racketeering activity" unde......
-
Causey v. State, No. 92-2188
...of the terms of a probation order. We note that chapter 948, Florida Statutes, contains no such provision. See also Morganti v. State, 557 So.2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), approved, 573 So.2d 820 We affirm as to the other issues raised. We find no error or abuse of discretion in the trial cou......
-
Morganti v. State, 75940
...Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent. OVERTON, Justice. Patrick Joseph Morganti seeks review of Morganti v. State, 557 So.2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal approved a resentencing which was within the sentencing guidelines, but which ......