Ramsey v. State, 84-804
| Decision Date | 30 January 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-804,84-804 |
| Citation | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 291,462 So.2d 875 |
| Parties | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 291 Leonard J. RAMSEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, Bartow, and Allyn Gaimbalvo, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Katherine V. Blanco, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
THOMPSON, JAMES R., Associate Judge.
The appellant, Leonard J. Ramsey, seeks reversal of the sentence imposed by the trial court which departed from the sentencing guidelines. Fla.Rule Crim.P. 3.701. On appeal Ramsey argues that the trial court erred in sentencing him outside the recommended guidelines because the court gave no reasons at sentencing or with the judgment and sentence to justify the departure. We agree. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(11) provides that any sentence outside the guidelines must be accompanied by a written statement delineating the reasons for departure. Although this court recognizes that reasons for departure stated in the transcript may satisfy this requirement, see Webster v. State, 461 So.2d 965 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), in this case no reasons were given by the lower court in a written statement or orally at the sentencing hearing.
We note that the failure of the appellant's counsel to contemporaneously object to the sentence imposed does not vitiate the appellant's right to appeal. Rhoden v. State, 448 So.2d 1013 (Fla.1984).
Accordingly, we vacate the appellant's sentence and remand for resentencing to the presumptive sentence or to a departure sentence imposed in accordance with the sentencing guidelines.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bradley v. State, s. 84-2311
...the record on appeal. See State v. Rhoden, 448 So.2d 1013 (Fla.1984); Hart v. State, 464 So.2d 592 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Ramsey v. State, 462 So.2d 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Myrick v. State, 461 So.2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). In the case before us, the scoring inaccuracies are readily determina......
-
State v. Whitfield
...errors. Mitchell v. State, 458 So.2d 10 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Myrick v. State, 461 So.2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Ramsey v. State, 462 So.2d 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Tucker v. State, 464 So.2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)." Whitfield, 471 So.2d at 634. However, the district court was apparently tro......
-
Whitfield v. State, BC-2
...errors. Mitchell v. State, 458 So.2d 10 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Myrick v. State, 461 So.2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Ramsey v. State, 462 So.2d 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Tucker v. State, 464 So.2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA We note, however, that two recent decisions of the supreme court might be construed......
-
Smith v. State, 84-1826
...months incarceration. The absence of a contemporaneous objection does not preclude review of appellant's sentences. Ramsey v. State, 462 So.2d 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We affirm appellant's convictions; we reverse his sentences and remand for OTT and FRANK, JJ., concur. ...