Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

485 So. 2d 1285

485 So.2d 1285

11 Fla.L.Weekly 166

State v. Head

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided April 10, 1986

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1986-04-10

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently May 1996

6 state decisions

Relies on 476 So. 2d 158 - Albritton v. State · 476 So. 2d 161 - State v. Young · 473 So. 2d 18 - Hagin v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1986-04-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution, to answer the following certified question of great public importance:

WHEN AN APPELLATE COURT FINDS THAT A SENTENCING COURT RELIED UPON A REASON OR REASONS THAT ARE IMPERMISSIBLE UNDER FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.701 IN MAKING ITS DECISION TO DEPART FROM THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES, SHOULD THE APPELLATE COURT EXAMINE THE OTHER REASONS GIVEN BY THE SENTENCING COURT TO DETERMINE IF THOSE REASONS JUSTIFY A DEPARTURE FROM THE GUIDELINES OR SHOULD THE CASE BE REMANDED FOR A RESENTENC-ING?

¶2Head v. State, 473 So.2d 18, 19 (Fla.3d DCA 1985). We answered the identical question in State v. Young, 476 So.2d 161 (Fla.1985). Accord Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla.1985). The decision below, consistent with holdings of this Court, is approved.

¶3It is so ordered.

BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, OVERTON, MCDONALD, EHRLICH, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ.,' concur.
/485/so2d/1285 · .json · Public domain