Pope v. State, 88-787

Decision Date20 April 1989
Docket NumberNo. 88-787,88-787
Citation542 So.2d 423,14 Fla. L. Weekly 1010
Parties14 Fla. L. Weekly 1010 Daniel Joseph POPE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

James B. Gibson, Public Defender and Nancye R. Crouch, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee and Sean Daly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

ORFINGER, Judge.

Defendant appeals from a sentence imposed after the trial judge announced oral reasons for departure, but failed to provide written reasons. We must vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing for failure to provide written reasons. See State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985), receded from on other grounds, Wilkerson v. State, 513 So.2d 664 (Fla.1987).

A more troublesome issue raised in this appeal is the contention of appellant that in remanding the case for resentencing, we must advise the trial court that he is now precluded from entering a departure sentence because it was not done properly the first time. We reject that contention, but not without observing that the various district courts are in disarray on the issue of the proper instruction to be given the trial court when a cause is remanded due to the trial court's failure to initially provide written reasons for a departure sentence. Compare, e.g., Daughtry v. State, 521 So.2d 208 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 528 So.2d 1181 (Fla.1988) (where trial court failed to provide written reasons for the departure sentence the cause is remanded for resentencing within the recommended range or for a statement of proper written reasons for a departure from that range) with Jenkins v. State, 528 So.2d 527 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (where court failed to provide written reasons to support departure sentence the cause was remanded with directions to resentence defendant within the sentencing guidelines); compare Padgett v. State, 534 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (where court failed to provide written reasons for the departure sentence the cause was remanded with directions to provide written reasons to support the departure) 1 with Rangel v. State, 532 So.2d 84 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (court remanded for resentencing within the guidelines following the trial court's failure to provide written reasons for entering a departure sentence); compare Schmeisser v. State, 527 So.2d 276 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (cause reversed and remanded for the trial court to satisfy the requirement of giving written reasons for departing from the sentencing guidelines) with Florence v. State, 532 So.2d 1345 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (where the written order containing the reasons for departure was not completed contemporaneously with the pronouncement of sentence the appellate court reversed and remanded with instructions that appellant be resentenced within the guidelines). See also State v. Lawler, 531 So.2d 752 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (where no written reasons for downward departure, reversed for sentencing within guidelines range or "to provide written reasons for any departure therefrom.").

We agree with those cases which permit the trial court, on remand, to supply written reasons for departure where only oral reasons were given at sentencing. We find nothing in Shull v. Dugger, 515 So.2d 748 (Fla.1987) which prohibits this result.

In Oden v. State, 463 So.2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), approved, State v. Oden, 478 So.2d 51 (Fla.1985) the appellate court vacated a departure sentence for failure of the trial court to provide written reasons, and remanded for resentencing. In so doing, the court observed that "[s]hould the trial court again decide to depart from the guidelines, it should follow the requirements of Jackson [v. State, 454 So.2d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (written reasons required for departure, approved as to the requirement of written reasons, State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985)) ]." In Barbera v. State, 505 So.2d 413 (Fla.1987), in vacating a downward departure sentence, the supreme court remanded for resentencing "so that the trial judge can write out his specific reasons for departure." Nothing in the opinion distinguishes the writing requirements in mitigated sentences from those in aggravated sentences. We therefore reject the defendant's contention that the trial judge may not depart from the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • State v. Arnold
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 19. Oktober 1989
    ...the scoresheet and impose a guidelines sentence unless a guidelines departure is supported by written reasons. Pope v. State, 542 So.2d 423 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). 2 However, since there appears to be some confusion as to the terms and conditions of the plea, defendant should be given an oppor......
  • Pope v. State
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 26. April 1990
  • Reed v. State, 89-1525
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 19. April 1990
    ...Gen., Tallahassee, Dee R. Ball, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed on the authority of Pope v. State, 542 So.2d 423 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), rev. granted, 550 So.2d 467 AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH, COBB and PETERSON, JJ., concur. ON MOTION FOR REHEARING PETERSON, Judge. C......
  • Vara v. State, 87-03355
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 2. Juni 1989
    ...prohibits the trial court from articulating in writing previously pronounced valid departure reasons upon resentencing. Pope v. State, 542 So.2d 423 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). SCHEB, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., 1 In Davis, there was no evidence that the son actually witnessed his mother's shootin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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