Williams v. State, 95-3053
Decision Date | 16 April 1997 |
Docket Number | No. 95-3053,95-3053 |
Citation | 691 So.2d 1158 |
Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D958 James WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Evan H. Baron of Baron & Schantz, P.A., Pembroke Pines, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee; and Michelle A. Konig, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
This is a companion case to Rosado v. State, 691 So.2d 595 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). The defendant here was part of the same group of youths who beat a 38-year old man to death. All of the defendants, including Williams, pleaded nolo contendere to manslaughter without any agreement as to the sentence. As in Rosado, the only issues relate to sentencing.
The trial judge based his departure enhancement sentence in this case on victim vulnerability and an escalating pattern of criminal conduct. As to the issue of victim vulnerability, the trial court gave the identical reason he gave in Rosado. We therefore reverse as to victim vulnerability on the same grounds we stated in Rosado.
That leaves only the escalating pattern of criminal behavior to justify a harsher sentence than provided by the guidelines. The judge based his conclusion on 11 alleged instances in which defendant was involved with the juvenile system. Thus we may affirm the sentence only if the enhancement on this ground was proper.
Initially, the state argues that defendant has waived appellate review of this issue for failure to object below. With respect to sentencing issues, the supreme court has held that a contemporaneous objection is generally required. State v. Whitfield, 487 So.2d 1045 (Fla.1986). Because, however, the supreme court has consistently held that departure errors apparent on the face of the record do not require a contemporaneous objection in order to be preserved for appeal, we reject the state's waiver argument. See Taylor v. State, 601 So.2d 540 (Fla.1992) ( ).
The trial judge explained his finding of an escalating pattern of criminal conduct as follows:
"With your 11 prior contacts with this system, some auto thefts, burglary, sexual battery, this court finds that you have an escalating pattern of criminality and criminal activity...."
Defendant argues that mere contacts with the juvenile system lacking a judicial disposition are not a sufficient basis on which to find an escalating pattern of criminal conduct.
The enhancement departure ground for an escalating pattern of criminal conduct arises from section 921.001(8), Florida Statutes (1993), which provides:
[e.s.]
The term "prior record" is defined in section 921.0011(5), as follows:
[emphasis supplied]
As the highlighted parts of these two statutes demonstrate, the legislature has required that a departure on this ground must be rooted in convictions or juvenile dispositions. Hence, mere "contacts" with the juvenile system will not support a finding of an escalating pattern of criminal conduct. Thus, we agree with defendant that the trial court's reliance on all prior contacts with the juvenile system was improper. 1
Only two of the 11 contacts appear to have resulted in dispositions or adjudications. The record shows, however, that defense counsel challenged one of these juvenile dispositions described on the pre-sentence investigation report (PSI) and in the written submission from the Department of Juvenile Justice. 2 In Eutsey v. State, 383 So.2d 219 (Fla.1980), the court held that it was:
"imperative, where the defendant disputes the truth of hearsay statements contained in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cooper v. State, 4D99-2708.
...and make a finding of increasing violence, it was error to depart from the guidelines on that basis. See Williams v. State, 691 So.2d 1158, 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)(reversing departure sentence of appellant's co-defendant and holding that a departure based on escalating pattern of criminal ......
-
Williams v. State, 4D00-3325.
...Schneider, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee. FARMER, J. This is a sequel to our decision in Williams v. State, 691 So.2d 1158 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). On that appeal, defendant sought review of a sentence of 10 years in state prison, followed by 5 years probation, argui......