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

JOHN DANIEL HUDSON, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his sentences for possession and delivery of drugs and contends that there were impermissible reasons for the trial court's departure from the presumptive sentencing range under the guidelines. We agree and reverse.

The trial court's reason that the defendant, while on probation, was in possession of cocaine under circumstances indicating that he was selling cocaine was impermissible because it related to an offense for which a conviction was not obtained. See Dawkins v. State, 487 So.2d 63 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). The trial court's reason that the defendant was a threat to society was impermissible. See Martinez-Diaz v. State, 484 So.2d 633 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

Reversed and remanded for sentencing within the presumptive guidelines range or one cell higher for the violation of probation.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and LEHAN and FRANK, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HUDSON v. STATE
(Feb 12, 1987)