Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

659 So. 2d 295

Tibbs v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 15, 1994

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1994-12-15

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 2008

Relies on Edler v. State · 629 So. 2d 841 - Brown v. State · 604 So. 2d 1250 - Jeter v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-12-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1The appellant seeks review of his adjudication of guilt and sentences after he pled no contest to numerous charges of sale of cocaine within 200 feet of a public housing facility, possession of cocaine with intent to sell within 200 feet of a public housing facility, and possession of cocaine. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

¶2Appellant first argues that the trial judge erred in denying his motion to dismiss certain charges. Appellant correctly notes that the supreme court found section 893.13(l)(i), Florida Statutes, which imposes enhanced penalties on those who sell, purchase, manufacture, deliver, or possess controlled substances within 200 feet of a public housing facility, unconstitutionally vague because the phrase “public housing facility” does not give adequate notice of what conduct is prohibited. Brown v. State, 629 So.2d 841 (Fla.1994). We therefore reverse the convictions based on violation of section 893.13(l)(i) and remand for proceedings consistent with Brown.

¶3It is also necessary to reverse the sentences imposed for possession of cocaine in violation of section 893.13(l)(f), Florida Statutes. The five and one-half year sentences imposed exceed the statutory maximum sentence for a third degree felony. Accordingly, we remand for resentencing on the charges of possession of cocaine.

¶4Appellant asserts that he was a juvenile when the offenses in three of the cases were committed. Appellant argues that the trial judge erred in sentencing him as an adult in these three cases without addressing any of the statutory criteria of section 39.059(7), Florida Statutes. The state concedes error. Troutman v. State, 630 So.2d 528 (Fla.1993). On remand, the trial judge must consider the criteria of section 39.059(7) before determining the suitability of adult sanctions with regard to the offenses committed while a juvenile. Before resentencing the appellant, a correct sentencing guidelines scoresheet shall be prepared. See Jeter v. State, 604 So.2d 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).

¶5REVERSED and REMANDED.

BARFIELD, KAHN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
/659/so2d/295 · .json · Public domain