State v. Tuthill
| Decision Date | 29 January 1986 |
| Citation | 484 So.2d 10 |
| Parties | State v. Tuthill (Harold) NO. 67,947 |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
Tuthill v. State, 86-847
...on the question of the severity of the sentence to be imposed." Tuthill v. State, 478 So.2d 409, 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), review denied, 484 So.2d 10 (Fla.1986). Although we affirmed the trial court's revocation of probation, we remanded the cause to the trial court for resentencing. On rema......
-
Pastor v. State, 85-2052
... ... The trial court erred in foreclosing the presentation of matters relevant to the sentence. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.720(b); State v. Scott, 439 So.2d 219 (Fla.1983); Tuthill v. State, 478 So.2d 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 484 So.2d 10 (Fla.1986) ... For the foregoing reasons, Pastor's conviction for drug trafficking is affirmed, and the sentence is reversed and the cause is remanded for resentencing consistent with the views expressed in this ... ...
-
Davis v. State, 93-2355
... ... State, 435 So.2d 258, 259 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) ... Here, the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to allow the appellant to present the mitigating circumstances of his prior conviction. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.720(b). See State v. Scott, 439 So.2d 219 (Fla.1983); Tuthill v. State, 478 So.2d 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), review denied, 484 So.2d 10 (Fla.1986); Hargis, 451 So.2d 551. Accordingly, the case must be remanded for a new ... ...
-
State v. Munson, 91-2452
... ... Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.720(b) ... Florida courts have consistently held that the failure to comply with the imperative of rule 3.720(b) is reversible error. Mask v. State, 289 So.2d 385, 387 (Fla.1973); Hargis v. State, 451 So.2d 551, 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Tuthill v. State, 478 So.2d 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 484 So.2d 10 (Fla.1986); State v. Hohl, 431 So.2d 707, 709 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). As Judge Scheb pointed out in Hohl: ... These authorities refer to cases where the defendants' rights have been infringed; yet justice is due the accusor [sic] ... ...