Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

728 So. 2d 347

Docket No. 98-02507.

State v. Zumpf

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. George O. ZUMPF, Sr., Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1999-03-17

Relies on 707 So. 2d 1155 - State v. Licea

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1999-03-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2010

7 state decisions

50199920002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Erica M. Raffel, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellant.

¶2Robert O. Bauer, Jr., Clearwater, for Appellee.

¶3WHATLEY, Judge.

¶4In this appeal of George O. Zumpf's downward departure sentence, the State contends that a preponderance of the evidence does not support the reason given for mitigation. That reason was Zumpf's cooperation with the State. The only support for this reason was statements by defense counsel. This is insufficient because testimony or evidence must be presented. See State v. Licea,707 So.2d 1155, 1157 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

¶5Accordingly, we reverse Zumpf's sentence. Because the sentence was the result of a plea agreement, upon remand Zump'f must be given the opportunity to withdraw his plea and proceed to trial. If he declines that opportunity, the trial court must impose a guidelines sentence.

¶6Reversed and remanded with directions.

¶7FULMER, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., Concur.

/728/so2d/347 · .json · Public domain