Woods v. State, 88-1234
| Decision Date | 27 April 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-1234,88-1234 |
| Citation | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1054,542 So.2d 443 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1054 Henry E. WOODS Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Glen P. Gifford, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Dee R. Ball, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
The appellant, Henry Eugene Woods, entered a plea of nolo contendere to a grand theft charge. In return for the plea, the state dropped a burglary count and recommended withholding of adjudication and a two-year probationary term. At the time of the plea, the trial court explained to Woods that he could receive a prison sentence up to five years.
The guidelines sentencing cell was any nonstate prison sanction. Woods requested that he be sentenced to time served and not be given a term of probation, so that he would be free to leave Florida without any legal encumbrances. The trial court, however, imposed a probationary term of five years.
On appeal, Woods contends that since he represented to the court that he was not a viable candidate for probation, it was error for the trial court to force probation on him, even if this meant an incarcerative term of up to 30 months "within the next higher guidelines cell." According to Woods, a defendant has the right to reject probation and it was error for the trial court not to allow him to do so. Woods relies upon two cases in support of his position: Williams v. State, 522 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) and Holley v. State, 483 So.2d 854 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986).
In Holley we held that if a defendant refused to cooperate or accept probation or community control when that was the recommended sentence (any nonstate prison sanction), then the court could depart upward one cell, provided that the defendant was advised of possible alternatives, and "was clearly given an election between the recommended guideline sentence of any nonstate prison sanction and a sentence one cell block upward." Holley at 855; Williams at 1022.
Those cases are somewhat different from the problem presented by Woods. Our concern in the prior case was that the defendant be fully apprised by the trial court of the possibility of a one-cell departure upward (12-30 months incarceration) pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701.d.14, prior to being allowed to reject probation and receive a sentence of incarceration...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Yates v. State
...State v. Kinney, 217 Neb. 701, 350 N.W.2d 552 (1984); Phillips v. State, 550 So.2d 55 (Fla.App. 5th Dist.1989); Woods v. State, 542 So.2d 443 (Fla.App. 5th Dist.1989). See State v. Migliorino, 150 Wis.2d 513, 442 N.W.2d 36 (1989), cert. denied sub nom. Haines v. Wisconsin, 493 U.S. 1004, 11......
-
Morganti v. State
...reject Morganti's claim that the trial judge was prohibited from imposing a term of probation over his objection. See Woods v. State, 542 So.2d 443 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Smith v. State, 513 So.2d 1367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Dearth v. State, 390 So.2d 108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). We note that these......
-
Morganti v. State, 89-0053
...v. State, 465 So.2d 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). The probation portion of the sentence imposed was a lawful sentence. Woods v. State, 542 So.2d 443 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Evans v. State, 544 So.2d 1160 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). We have considered Brown v. State and Dearth v. State and do not read these......
-
Phillips v. State, 88-1917
...initial sentence announced by the trial judge, insisting on a "right" to reject probation, which he did not have. See Woods v. State, 542 So.2d 443 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Deferring to the objection, the trial judge postponed sentencing and, in the interim, obtained additional information in r......