Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

555 So. 2d 960

Ridgeway v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 24, 1990

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1990-01-24

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1990

1 state decisions

Relies on 507 So. 2d 686 - Mitchell v. State · 502 So. 2d 63 - Matthews v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1990-01-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Appellant was sentenced outside the guidelines range and argues that the reasons given for departure were invalid. We agree, vacate the sentence imposed, and reverse and remand for sentencing within the guidelines.

¶2The order of trial court setting forth the reasons for departure stated the recommended sentence was “insufficient to properly rehabilitate the defendant, protect society, and provide restitution_” The protection of society is not a valid reason for departure. Mitchell v. State, 507 So.2d 686 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). The need for rehabilitation is also an invalid basis for departure. Matthews v. State, 502 So.2d 63 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). While the trial court may order restitution, it is in addition to any punishment and is not considered in the sentencing guidelines. Section 775.089, Florida Statutes.

¶3Pursuant to Rule 9.315(b), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, the sentence is vacated and this cause reversed and remanded for sentencing within the guidelines.

ERVIN, SMITH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.
/555/so2d/960 · .json · Public domain