State v. Chesney
| Decision Date | 01 July 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-2850,86-2850 |
| Citation | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1629,509 So.2d 380 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1629 STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Michael CHESNEY, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Lauren Hafner Sewell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, Bartow, and Allyn Giambalvo, Clearwater, for appellee.
Appellant, State of Florida, appeals from appellee, Michael Chesney's, sentence. The state argues that the court improperly departed downward from the guidelines recommendation. Appellant entered negotiated guilty pleas to charges of attempted sexual battery, burglary and battery on a law enforcement officer. The sentencing guidelines presumptive range was nine to twelve years, but the court imposed a sentence of five years on each of three cases, to run concurrent. Appellant had a record of burglary and grand theft as a juvenile.
The court stated that it had no reason for departing from the guidelines, but subsequently offered three reasons, none of which are clear and convincing. First, the judge's own belief that a reduced sentence is more appropriate is an impermissible reason for departure. Williams v. State, 492 So.2d 1308, 1309 (Fla.1986). Second, judicial economy is an impermissible reason for departure. See In re Rules of Criminal Procedure (Sentencing Guidelines), 439 So.2d 848, 849 (Fla.1983). Third, there is no record proof that appellee had mental problems. Defense counsel's assertions are not sufficient.
We, therefore, vacate appellee's sentence and remand for resentencing within the guidelines range.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Milici, Case No. 5D16–2353
...on its own belief that sentencing Milici in accordance with his scoresheet "serve[d] no legitimate purpose." See State v. Chesney , 509 So.2d 380, 381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) ("[T]he judge's own belief that a reduced sentence is more appropriate is an impermissible reason for departure." (citing......
-
State v. Silver, 97-3478.
...by trial court "were not proven by a preponderance of the evidence because no testimony or evidence was presented"); State v. Chesney, 509 So.2d 380, 381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (where there is no record evidence establishing downward departure basis, sentence must be reversed; defense counsel's......
-
State v. Brady, s. 86-3204
...is no evidentiary support for either of the two reasons given by the trial court to justify the said departure, see State v. Chesney, 509 So.2d 380, 381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Mitchell v. State, 507 So.2d 686, 688 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Medlock v. State, 489 So.2d 848, 849 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), a......
-
State v. Silver, 97-3478.
...by trial court "were not proven by a preponderance of the evidence because no testimony or evidence was presented"); State v. Chesney, 509 So.2d 380, 381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (where there is no record evidence establishing downward departure basis, sentence must be reversed; defense counsel's......