Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

486 So. 2d 61

486 So.2d 61

11 Fla.L.Weekly 849

Docket No. 85-855.

Campbell v. State

Wilbur Ellis CAMPBELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1986-04-09

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1987

5 state decisions

Relies on 476 So. 2d 158 - Albritton v. State · 475 So. 2d 1218 - Hendrix v. State · 458 So. 2d 37 - Mischler v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1986-04-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Ellen Morris, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

¶2Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Lee Rosenthal, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

¶3WALDEN, Judge.

¶4Wilbur Ellis Campbell was given a ten (10) year sentence. This was an enhancement — a departure from the recommended sentencing guidelines. The trial court based the departure upon these reasons:

1. Previous conviction of weapons charge — felony — shooting into occupied dwelling;
2. Defendant's total disregard of safety for others;
3. No remorse — jury totally disregarded self-defense;
4. Court firmly believes defendant will use firearm again.

¶5Reason No. 1 has been termed as "double-dipping" because the prior conviction is *62 already figured in the guidelines scoresheet. It is now the law of this state, per cases decided after the taking of this appeal, that since prior convictions are already factored in as a part of the presumptive guidelines sentence, they may not be used as a clear and convincing reason for departure. State v. Davis,477 So.2d 565 (Fla. 1985); State v. Williams,477 So.2d 570 (Fla. 1985); Hendrix v. State,475 So.2d 1218 (Fla. 1985).

¶6Reason No. 2 has been found to be an acceptable reason. Harrington v. State,455 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) and Williams v. State,454 So.2d 751 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

¶7Reason Nos. 3 and 4 have been held to be insufficient reasons for departure. Mischler v. State,458 So.2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) and Davis v. State,458 So.2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), approved by 477 So.2d 565 (Fla. 1985).

¶8Using the criteria found in Albritton v. State,476 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1985), we reverse the sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance with the views herein expressed.

¶9As to the suggestion that a fine or costs were incorrectly imposed, the record does not support such allegation.

¶10Reversed and Remanded.

¶11DELL, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F. (Retired), Associate Judge, concur.

/486/so2d/61 · .json · Public domain