Rivera v. State

• Decision Date: 10 October 1991
• Docket Number: Nos. 77771,77784,s. 77771
• Citation: 586 So.2d 1060
• Parties: Ralph RIVERA, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Bruce PATRICK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Lester DAVIS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Montgomery Scott SHIEL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Michael GANTT, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Dennis DUSSAULT, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Darren ISOM, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Donald Lee KELLY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. John Arthur FICICHY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. Bobby ADAMS, etc., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. to 77787 and 77803 to 77807. 586 So.2d 1060, 16 Fla. L. Week. S673
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

Page 1060

586 So.2d 1060

Ralph RIVERA, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Bruce PATRICK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Lester DAVIS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Montgomery Scott SHIEL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Michael GANTT, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Dennis DUSSAULT, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Darren ISOM, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Donald Lee KELLY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

John Arthur FICICHY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Bobby ADAMS, etc., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Nos. 77771, 77784 to 77787 and 77803 to 77807.

586 So.2d 1060, 16 Fla. L. Week. S673

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 10, 1991.

Consolidated Cases for Review of the Decisions of the District Court of Appeal--Certified Great Public Importance; Fifth District--Case Nos. 90-1848, 90-1748, 90- 1157, 90-1239, 90-1335, 90-1817, 90-1546, 90-1922, 90-1382, & 90-1328 (Brevard, Orange, Seminole Counties).

James B. Gibson, Public Defender and Michael S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, for petitioners.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and David S. Morgan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the consolidated cases of Rivera v. State, 576 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Patrick v. State, 576 So.2d 935 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Davis v. State, 576 So.2d 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Shiel v. State, 576 So.2d 931 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Gantt v. State, 576 So.2d 932 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Dussault v. State, 578 So.2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Isom v. State, 578 So.2d 431 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Kelly v. State, 578 So.2d 47 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Ficichy v. State, 578 So.2d 45 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), and Adams v. State, 577 So.2d 963 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), in which the Fifth District Court of Appeal certified in each case the same question of great public importance which the court certified in Flowers v. State, 567 So.2d 1055, 1055 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), quashed, 586 So.2d 1058 (Fla.1991):

DO FLORIDA'S UNIFORM SENTENCING GUIDELINES REQUIRE THAT LEGAL CONSTRAINT POINTS BE ASSESSED FOR EACH OFFENSE COMMITTED WHILE UNDER LEGAL CONSTRAINT?

We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution. Having answered this question in the negative in Flowers v. State, 586 So.2d 1058 (Fla.1991), we quash the decisions below and remand these cases to the district court for reconsideration in light of Flowers.

It is so ordered.

SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, BARKETT, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.