Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

475 So. 2d 1004

475 So.2d 1004

10 Fla.L.Weekly 2156

Docket No. 84-1853.

May v. State

Steven Earl MAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 19, 1985.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1985-09-19

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently October 1989

10 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“escalating pattern of more serious offenses”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including 492 So. 2d 741 - Pittman v. State, 489 So. 2d 1163 - DeGroat v. State

Relies on 475 So. 2d 1218 - Hendrix v. State · 456 So. 2d 448 - Amlotte v. State · 456 So. 2d 1245 - Burke v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1985-09-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1005 James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Larry B. Henderson, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

¶2Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sean Daly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4To correct a clerical error, the words "without a deadly weapon" are stricken from appellant's judgment and sentence which are hereby amended to show that, as to count one of the information against him, he pled guilty and was adjudicated and sentenced as to the offense of aggravated assault, a violation of section 784.021(1)(a), Florida Statutes. As amended the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

¶5The trial judge did not abuse his discretion in departing from the recommended guideline sentence for the reason that appellant's prior criminal record showed an ever increasing pattern of more serious offenses and that appellant's actions endangered several persons. See Murphy v. State,459 So.2d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Higgs v. State,455 So.2d 451 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Burke v. State,456 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). An escalating pattern of more serious offenses is not a factor scored under the guidelines and constitutes a proper reason for departure, as does the finding that the defendant's actions endangered several persons. Cf. Hendrix v. State,475 So.2d 1218 (Fla. 1985) (where factors scored under the guidelines were also used as reasons supporting departure).

¶6Presentence jail time credit is not required on each of concurrent sentences for identical terms of imprisonment. See Green v. State,450 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Amlotte v. State,435 So.2d 249 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), affirmed on other grounds,456 So.2d 448 (Fla. 1984); Fenn v. State,418 So.2d 286 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).

¶7AFFIRMED.

¶8COBB, C.J., and ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur.

/475/so2d/1004 · .json · Public domain