Wright v. State, 87-2054

Decision Date31 January 1989
Docket NumberNo. 87-2054,87-2054
Parties14 Fla. L. Weekly 342 Bryant WRIGHT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Henry H. Harnage, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Fariba N. Komeily, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.

BASKIN, Judge.

Bryant Wright seeks reversal of the trial court's upward departure from sentencing guidelines. Pursuant to negotiations with the state, Wright entered pleas of guilty to attempted first-degree murder and robbery with a deadly weapon. The state dropped the remaining three counts of the information. Initially, the sentencing scoresheet included 21 points for victim injury. These points were subsequently deleted at the sentencing hearing, leaving a point total of 181, which carried a 12-17 year recommended sentence. The trial court, departing from the guidelines, sentenced Wright to concurrent sentences of 25 years. At the hearing, the judge announced his reasons for departure:

THE COURT: ...

The Court in imposing this sentence is finding that victim injury is in fact not a statutory element of the offenses of attempted murder. It is entirely possible for someone to complete the offense of attempted murder with no injury taking place. It is therefore not a statutory element and should not have been scored and the Court is finding it as one of the reasons for departure.

In addition, the Court finds that the excessive and cruel force used in the perpetration of both the attempted murder and of the robbery would justify departure. The Court will attach the transcript of the victim's testimony of the occurrence as part of the record and will be forwarded with the file.

Wright asserts that the trial court erred in departing from the sentencing guidelines. We disagree and affirm.

The record discloses that appellant Wright and his girlfriend entered the store in which the victim was employed, and engaged her in conversation for a long period of time, after which the couple left the store. Wright returned a short time later with a large Bowie knife and told the victim to go to the cash register and get the money. The victim complied with Wright's request. At that point, Wright ordered the victim into a dressing room, where he attempted to assault her sexually. When the victim asked him to take the money and leave without assaulting her, Wright stabbed her twice. After the victim begged Wright not to kill her over such a small amount of money, Wright positioned the knife over the victim's sternum, and began to press down with both hands. A sudden noise frightened Wright, and he fled from the store with the money. The victim was able to go to an adjacent store and request help, although she sustained severe injuries. According to medical testimony, she was cut from the top of her abdomen to the pubic bone. Three ribs were severed; her stomach, spleen, and peritoneum were cut open; and the nerves in her right hand were severed. Her injuries necessitated three operations and left her numb in a large area of her abdomen. She also suffers from stiffness and numbness in her right hand.

Wright argues that the trial court erred in failing to provide written reasons for its departure from the guidelines sentence; however, resentencing is required only when the trial court has failed to state any reasons for its guidelines departure. State v. Vickery, 536 So.2d 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); State v. Martinez, 534 So.2d 1248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); State v. Wayda, 533 So.2d 939 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Here, the trial court stated its reasons for departure.

Next, Wright argues that the trial court relied upon invalid reasons in departing from the guidelines sentence. Victim injury is not an essential element of attempted murder or of robbery with a deadly weapon. 1 Massard v. State, 501 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), review dismissed, 504 So.2d 403 (Fla.1987). Thus, victim injury may support a departure from sentencing guidelines. Hansbrough v State, 509 So.2d 1081 (Fla.1...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Knox v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 26, 1989
    ...valid and supported by the record. The use of excessive force, Bannerman v. State, 544 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Wright v. State, 538 So.2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Harris v. State, 482 So.2d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Smith v. State, 454 So.2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); victim injury not sc......
  • Brown v. State, 91-867
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • December 15, 1992
    ...use by the defendant constitutes a valid reason for departure. McCall, 524 So.2d at 663; Barnes, 597 So.2d at 932; Wright v. State, 538 So.2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Smith v. State, 454 So.2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Accordingly, considering the way the crime was committed, the decision to de......
  • Williams v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 2, 1994
    ...So.2d 1335 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Jones v. State, 582 So.2d 110 (Fla. 3d DCA), cause dismissed, 592 So.2d 681 (Fla.1991); Wright v. State, 538 So.2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). ...
  • Green v. State, 90-344
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • December 26, 1990
    ...in the presence of the defendant, which was done in this case. Williams v. State, 531 So.2d 212, (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Wright v. State, 538 So.2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The State does agree however, that the trial court may not rely on both victim injury and excessive use of force. In as mu......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT