Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2000

Mandri v. State

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided July 5, 2000 · Gersten, Levy, Shevin

767 So. 2d 523; 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8285; 2000 WL 873188 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Mandri v. State (Fla. 2002)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

070rehearing

*524 ON MOTION FOR REHEARING/CERTIFICATION

PER CURIAM.

We deny defendant’s motion for rehearing. We grant defendant’s motion to certify the following question of great public importance:

WHERE A TRIAL COURT FAILS TO FILE WRITTEN REASONS IN SUPPORT OF A GUIDELINES DEPARTURE SENTENCE BUT, THEREAFTER, IN RESPONSE TO A FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.800(B) MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT, DOES FILE WRITTEN REASONS JUSTIFYING THE DEPARTURE, IS DEFENDANT ENTITLED TO A REVERSAL AND A REMAND FOR A GUIDELINES SENTENCE, UNDER MADDOX v. STATE, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla. 2000)?

Question certified.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla. 2000); State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 1986).

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