Roseman v. State, 87-177
| Decision Date | 11 February 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-177,87-177 |
| Citation | 519 So.2d 1129,13 Fla. L. Weekly 405 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 405 Andrew J. ROSEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender and Michael S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee and Paul C. Coffman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
In departing from the recommended guidelines sentence of 12 to 17 years' imprisonment and ordering that defendant be incarcerated for 25 years, the trial court relied on both valid and invalid reasons. We will summarize the reasons given.
(1) The relatively short time [11 months] between defendant's release on parole after serving 13 years on a 99 year sexual battery sentence and the commission of the instant offenses. A relatively short amount of time between release and the commission of subsequent crimes is a valid reason for departure. White v. State, 481 So.2d 993 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Eleven months between release and commission of an offense is not too long a gap to be a valid ground for departure. Hogan v. State, 12 F.L.W. 2375 (Fla. 1st DCA Oct. 7, 1987).
(2) Threats on the life of the victim of the armed robbery. The taking of money or property from a victim by "force, violence, assault, or putting in fear" is an inherent element of the crime of robbery. § 812.13, Fla.Stat. (1985). An inherent component of the crime for which defendant is sentenced cannot also be relied upon as a valid reason for departure. State v. Cote, 487 So.2d 1039 (Fla.1986); Williams v. State, 500 So.2d 604 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986).
(3) The psychological and emotional harm suffered by the victim. There was no finding by the trial court that the victim's trauma resulted from extraordinary circumstances not inherent in the crime charged and thus psychological trauma was an invalid reason for departure. State v. Rousseau, 509 So.2d 281 (Fla.1987).
(4) Defendant's escape from custody between the time of conviction and the time he was sentenced. Defendant acknowledges the validity of departing based upon unscored subsequent convictions. Safford v. State, 488 So.2d 141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Davis v. State, 455 So.2d 602 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).
(5) The "avoidance of disparity" objective of the guidelines would be frustrated by giving defendant a guidelines sentence because defendant's prior record is not adequately addressed by the guidelines. We consider this a statement by the trial judge that departure is necessary based on the valid reasons given in the departure order. Scott v. State, 508...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lipscomb v. State
...will justify a timing departure, we have previously held that 11 months is not so long as to prevent departure. 6 Roseman v. State, 519 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). We hold that a new offense within 6 months of release from prison is of sufficient "temporal proximity" to justify The next......
-
Bailey v. State
...3d DCA 1986); Brunson v. State, 492 So.2d 1155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Smith v. State, 526 So.2d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Roseman v. State, 519 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Salas v. State, 544 So.2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA For these reasons, we affirm Bailey's convictions for sexual battery, kid......
-
Strawn v. State
...from a victim by "force, violence, assault, or putting in fear" is an inherent element of the crime of robbery. Roseman v. State, 519 So.2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). The use of a mask during the robberies, the seventh reason, might be valid, but it is not in the instant case. Section ......
-
Morgan v. State, 87-875
...sentence and whether the trial court erred in imposing costs. The departure sentence is affirmed on the authority of Roseman v. State, 519 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). On the point raised by the appellant concerning the imposition of costs, this court has been governed by Jones v. State,......