Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

LOUIS MATIRE, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the conviction. However, the state admits that in light of the holding in Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863 (Fla. 1986), decided subsequent to the sentencing proceedings below, a habitual offender status is not an adequate reason to depart from the sentencing guidelines. Therefore, the trial judge erred in departing from the guidelines on the basis of finding the defendant a habitual offender. Accordingly, we remand for sentencing within the guidelines range.

GLICKSTEIN and GUNTHER, JJ., and LUZZO, JOHN T., Associate Judge, concur.

PER CURIAM.

UPON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

Appellant's motion for rehearing is granted in part, and we delete from the last sentence of the first paragraph in the September 16, 1987, opinion in this case the closing clause, "unless the trial court states valid reasons for departure," as well as the subsequent two paragraphs.

This modification takes cognizance of the recent holding of the Florida Supreme Court that when the trial court's only stated reason for departure from the guidelines sentencing range is invalid, resentencing must be within the presumptive guidelines range. Shull v. Dugger, 515 So.2d 748, 750 (Fla. 1987). Therefore, on remand, the trial court may not utilize new reasons to justify a departure from the recommended guidelines sentence.

GLICKSTEIN and GUNTHER, JJ., and LUZZO, JOHN T., Associate Judge, concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATIRE v. STATE
(Mar 2, 1988)