Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

519 So. 2d 613

Docket No. 70588.

State v. Koopman

STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Charles KOOPMAN, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided January 28, 1988.

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1988-01-28

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1989

5 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“May the quantity of drugs involved in possession or delivery of cocaine be used as a proper reason to support a valid departure from the sentencing guidelines?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 524 So. 2d 1020 - State v. Braxton

Relies on 519 So. 2d 611 - Atwaters v. State · 507 So. 2d 684 - Koopman v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1988-01-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*614 Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Erica M. Raffel, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for petitioner.

¶2Daniel M. Hernandez of Daniel M. Hernandez, P.A., Tampa, for respondent.

¶3BARKETT, Justice.

¶4We accepted jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution to answer the question of great public importance certified in Koopman v. State,507 So.2d 684, 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987):

May the quantity of drugs involved in possession or delivery of cocaine be used as a proper reason to support a valid departure from the sentencing guidelines?

¶5In Atwaters v. State,519 So.2d 611 (Fla. 1988), we held that the quantity of drugs involved in a crime cannot be a proper reason to support departure from the sentencing guidelines. Accordingly, we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the decision of the district court.

¶6It is so ordered.

¶7McDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

/519/so2d/613 · .json · Public domain