WISE v. STATE

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 91-03882.

Attorney(S)

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, Bartow,
D.P. Chanco,
Public Defender, Bartow, for
Robert A. Butterworth,
, Tallahassee,
Charles Corces, Jr.,
, Tampa, for

Judges

BLUE, Judge.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

Rico Wise appealed his sentence and the order of restitution imposed by the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County. The appeal challenges the trial court’s handling of the restitution determination following sentencing.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the trial court erred in sentencing Rico Wise.
Whether the trial court improperly delegated its responsibility to determine the amount of restitution to the Florida Department of Corrections.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Barron v. State, 598 So.2d 181 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)	Trial court’s responsibility to determine restitution amount without improper delegation.	Supported the court’s conclusion that the trial court improperly delegated restitution determination to the Department of Corrections.
Bostic v. State, 504 So.2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)	Clarification of proper procedures regarding restitution orders.	Reinforced the principle that restitution amounts must be determined by the trial court, not delegated.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court reviewed the record and found no error in the sentencing of Rico Wise. However, it identified a procedural error in the handling of restitution. Specifically, the trial court improperly delegated the determination of the restitution amount to the Florida Department of Corrections, which is contrary to established precedent requiring the trial court itself to determine restitution amounts. The court relied on prior decisions in Barron v. State and Bostic v. State to support this analysis. Consequently, the court reversed the restitution order and remanded the case for the trial court to properly determine the restitution amount.

Holding and Implications

The court affirmed the sentence but reversed the restitution order.

The trial court’s sentencing of Rico Wise was upheld as free of error. However, the restitution order was reversed due to improper delegation of restitution determination to the Florida Department of Corrections. The case was remanded to the trial court to set an appropriate restitution amount. This decision directly affects the parties by requiring the trial court to fulfill its statutory duty regarding restitution, but it does not establish new legal precedent beyond reaffirming established principles.

Show full summary ...

RICO WISE, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

BLUE, Judge.

Rico Wise appeals his sentence and order of restitution. A review of the record reveals no error in sentencing. However, the trial court improperly delegated to the Florida Department of Corrections its responsibility to determine the amount of restitution to be paid. Barron v. State, 598 So.2d 181 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Bostic v. State, 504 So.2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). We reverse the order of restitution and remand to the trial court to determine an appropriate amount of restitution.

HALL, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.