Rease v. State, 493 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Rease v. State, 493 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
32 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Lewis v. State, 550 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986 2006 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 455 trial court could not deviate from recommended sentence by adding consecutive sentences on other counts arising from the same incident, when those convictions were taken into account in computing the recommended sentence, without setting forth proper reasons for its departure; therefore re-sentenci…3 citing cases2 citing courts put it this way
  • Lewis v. State, 550 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).published
    Rease v. State, 493 So.2d 454, 455 (Fla. 1986).
  • Junco v. State, 540 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).published 2 cites
    “consecutive sentences on other counts arising from the same incident, when those convictions were taken into account in computing the recommended sentence”
  • Cleveland v. State, 673 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).published
    (trial court could not deviate from recommended sentence by adding consecutive sentences on other counts arising from the same incident, when those convictions were taken into account in computing the recommended sentenc…)
Other citing cases5 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Michael REASE, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
68069.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Sep 4, 1986.
Published opinion
493 So. 2d 454
Overton.
Cited by 29 opinions  |  Published

Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Patricia Conners, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent.

OVERTON, Justice.

This is a petition to review Rease v. State, 478 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), in which the district court certified the[*455] following question as being of great public importance:

Whether, when the sentencing guidelines recommend a sentence of life imprisonment, the trial court may sentence a defendant to life imprisonment plus sixty years in prison on other counts, to run consecutive to the life sentence, without stating clear and convincing reasons for departing from the guidelines.

Id. at 1151. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We answer the question in the negative and quash the district court decision. We conclude that the trial court did deviate from the recommended sentence by adding consecutive sentences on other counts arising from the same incident, when those convictions were taken into account in computing the recommended sentence. The trial judge failed to set forth proper reasons for his departure. We adopt and approve the analysis and reasoning of the dissent of Judge Zehmer directed to the specific issue in this case, quash the district court decision, and direct the district court to remand this cause for resentencing.

It is so ordered.

McDONALD, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, SHAW, EHRLICH and BARKETT, JJ., concur.