Narrative Opinion Summary
Imposing a departure sentence under the sentencing guidelines requires a written statement outlining the reasons for the departure, as mandated by Fla.R.Crim. P. 3.701(d)(11). The habitual offender statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1985), cannot serve as a basis for such a departure sentence, as established in State v. Jackson and further reinforced in Whitehead v. State and Vicknair v. State. Consequently, the defendant’s sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing. The decision is concurred by Chief Judge Upchurch and Judges Orfinger and Cowart.
Legal Issues Addressed
Inapplicability of Habitual Offender Statute for Departure Sentencessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The habitual offender statute cannot be used as a justification for a departure sentence, a position supported by precedent cases.
Reasoning: The habitual offender statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1985), cannot serve as a basis for such a departure sentence, as established in State v. Jackson and further reinforced in Whitehead v. State and Vicknair v. State.
Requirements for Departure Sentencessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The case clarifies that imposing a departure sentence requires a written statement specifying the reasons for the departure under the sentencing guidelines.
Reasoning: Imposing a departure sentence under the sentencing guidelines requires a written statement outlining the reasons for the departure, as mandated by Fla.R.Crim. P. 3.701(d)(11).
Vacating and Remanding for Resentencingsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Due to the improper basis for the departure sentence, the defendant's sentence is vacated, and the case is sent back for resentencing.
Reasoning: Consequently, the defendant’s sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing.