Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

543 So. 2d 441

543 So.2d 441

14 Fla.L.Weekly 1268

Rivera v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1989-05-23

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1991

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“because the stated reason is an inherent component of the crime of trafficking in cocaine.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 558 So. 2d 34 - Campbell v. State

Relies on 502 So. 2d 1347 - Young v. State · Collins v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1989-05-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We affirm Rivera’s convictions for trafficking in cocaine and marijuana. However, we reverse Rivera’s sentences because the two reasons given by the trial court for departure from the sentencing guidelines were invalid.

¶2The first reason for departure — that Rivera was a professional drug dealer— was invalid; being a drug dealer is an inherent component of the crime of drug trafficking. Young v. State, 502 So.2d 1347 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

¶3The second reason for departure— the “professional manner” in which Rivera committed the crime — was also invalid. Collins v. State, 535 So.2d 661 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). We, therefore, remand for sentencing within the guidelines.

¶4Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded with directions.

/543/so2d/441 · .json · Public domain