Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

638 So. 2d 213

Goodman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1994-06-29

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently September 1997

4 state decisions

Relies on 448 So. 2d 1013 - State v. Rhoden

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-06-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Edmond Goodman, Jr., a minor, appeals from his convictions for two counts of burglary of a conveyance, grand theft auto and robbery with a firearm .and his subsequent sentence as an adult. Goodman argues that the trial court erred by not following the proper-procedure when imposing adult sanctions on him, in accordance with the requirements of State v. Rhoden, 448 So.2d 1013 (Fla.1984). Rhodenexplains that section 39.-059(7) sets forth six criteria to be considered by a trial court and requires the court to make written findings regarding those factors prior to sentencing a juvenile as an adult. The state concedes the error. Thus, we affirm the convictions but reverse the sentence and remand for resentencing.

¶2REVERSED AND REMANDED.

GUNTHER, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
/638/so2d/213 · .json · Public domain