Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

489 So. 2d 858

489 So.2d 858

11 Fla.L.Weekly 1278

Docket No. BD-373.

Christy v. State

Raymond C. CHRISTY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 6, 1986.

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

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently August 1989

5 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[t]he sophistication and maturity of the child, as determined by consideration of his home, environmental situation, emotional attitude, and pattern of living.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 503 So. 2d 435 - West v. State

“render a specific finding of fact and the reasons for the decision to impose adult sanctions,”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 520 So. 2d 43 - Banks v. State

Relies on Murray v. State · 464 So. 2d 1355 - Upshaw v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1986-06-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*859 Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, Kenneth L. Hosford, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

¶2Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

¶3WENTWORTH, Judge.

¶4Appellant is a juvenile offender who seeks review of the court's imposition of adult criminal sanctions after nolo pleas to burglary charges. We find that the court erred by imposing such sanctions without fully complying with the requirements of section 39.111(6), Florida Statutes. We therefore vacate appellant's sentences and remand the cause for resentencing.

¶5Section 39.111(6)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that the suitability of adult sanctions for a juvenile offender shall be determined by reference to six specific listed criteria. Section 39.111(6)(d), Florida Statutes, requires that a decision to impose adult sanctions be expressed in writing, with a specific finding of fact and the reasons for the decision, in conformity with each of the listed criteria. In the present case the court did enter written orders with specific findings; however, these orders do not address, and the record does not reveal a thorough consideration of, appellant's "sophistication and maturity ... his home, environmental situation, emotional attitude, and pattern of living" as specified by section 39.111(6)(c)4, Florida Statutes. While the court did substantially comply with the statutory directive by addressing the other listed criteria, we conclude that in the circumstances presented the absence of any reference to appellant's "sophistication and maturity" as delineated by section 39.111(6)(c)4, Florida Statutes, requires resentencing. See Upshaw v. State,464 So.2d 1355 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Murray v. State,382 So.2d 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980).

¶6The sentences appealed are vacated and the cause remanded.

¶7MILLS and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.

/489/so2d/858 · .json · Public domain