Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

482 So. 2d 581

482 So.2d 581

11 Fla.L.Weekly 351

Kaymore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 6, 1986

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1986-02-06

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1986

2 state decisions

Relies on Tillman v. State · 464 So. 2d 672 - Irving v. State · 473 So. 2d 815 - Lowery v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1986-02-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Kaymore seeks reversal of his sentence which was a departure under the guidelines, thereby removing the sentence from parole consideration. The substantive offense occurred prior to the effective date of the guidelines and Kaymore did not affirmatively ask to be sentenced under the guidelines. Under these circumstances, we normally would reverse and remand for resentencing. Irving v. State, 464 So.2d 672 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Favors v. State, 473 So.2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). In this case, however, the record reveals that the trial court obviously would have imposed the maximum statutory penalty in any event, and no purpose would be served by resentencing. See Davis v. State, 478 So.2d 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Tillman v. State, 466 So.2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Accordingly, we affirm the sentence but remand with directions to correct the record to reflect that appellant was not sentenced under the guidelines.

¶2AFFIRMED and REMANDED for correction of the record.

COBB, C.J., and ORFINGER and SHARP, JJ., concur.
/482/so2d/581 · .json · Public domain