Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1991

Souter v. State

Souter v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided March 21, 1991 · Dauksch, Diamantis, Peterson
576 So. 2d 431; 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2424; 1991 WL 35990 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Souter v. State

Opinion of the Court

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence. Because the sentencing court erred, both procedurally, by not giving timely written reasons for a departure sentence, and substantively, by not giving legally sufficient written reasons for the departure sentence, we vacate the sentence for escape and remand for a proper guideline sentence. Ree v. State, 565 So.2d 1329 (Fla. 1990); State v. Brown, 530 So.2d 51 (Fla. 1988); Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863 (Fla. 1986). Appellant’s argument regarding other sentences and his classification as an habitual offender as to those is without merit. King v. State, 557 So.2d 899 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 564 So.2d 1086 (Fla. 1990). We affirm the robbery sentences.

AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; REMANDED.

PETERSON and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.