Cases from cite.case.law:

STATE v. CROSSLEY- ROBINSON,, 275 So. 3d 662 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2018). . . . . § 921.0026(2)(i). . . . The offenses committed were not "isolated incidents" within the meaning of section 921.0026(2)(j) "A . . . State , 826 So. 2d 509, 511 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (quoting § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2001) ). . . . All three factors must be established to justify a departure under subsection 921.0026(2)(j). . . .

STATE v. HANSEN,, 273 So. 3d 35 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . As grounds for departure, Hansen relied on section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes, asserting he required . . . general mitigating circumstances for sentencing any felony (except a capital felony) contained in section 921.0026 . . . Additionally, although section 790.163 was initially enacted in 1959, as compared to section 921.0026 . . . prohibition against withholding adjudication for false report of a bomb threat was enacted after section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. BELLAMY,, 269 So. 3d 674 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Bellamy qualified for a downward departure sentence based on section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes . . . 2d DCA 2014), this court held that the trial court's downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . .

RADICE, v. STATE, 271 So. 3d 1007 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Radice moved for a downward departure under section 921.0026(2)(j), Florida Statutes (2017), arguing . . . In granting the downward departure, the court relied on section 921.0026(2)(j), Florida Statutes (2017 . . . But when a trial court relies "solely on this mitigator, [ section 921.0026(2)(j) ], all three elements . . . established case law to permit a finding that the offenses at issue were isolated incidents" under section 921.0026 . . .

DAVIS, v. STATE, 268 So. 3d 958 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . ." § 921.0026(1), (2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2018). . . . Id. ; cf. also § 921.0026(2)(a) (authorizing downward departure if it "results from a legitimate, uncoerced . . . In fact, had Davis requested a downward departure based on section 921.0026(2)(a) -which requires a showing . . . See § 921.0026(1), (2)(j), Fla. . . . See, e.g. , § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. . . .

HIRALDO, DOC v. STATE, 268 So. 3d 955 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2016), provides for a departure from the lowest permissible . . . departure sentence, but it ultimately concluded that Hiraldo did not meet the legal criteria in section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. C. SCHULER,, 268 So. 3d 242 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Section 921.0026(1), Florida Statutes (2018), specifically prohibits a trial court from imposing a sentence . . . evidence at the sentencing hearing of at least one of the non-exclusive mitigating factors under section 921.0026 . . . The defendant sought a downward departure under section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2018), which . . . of a treatment plan or that the defendant would be amenable to the plan, as required under section 921.0026 . . . Under these circumstances, the downward departure sentence imposed here under section 921.0026(2)(d) . . .

STATE v. HERRERA- FERNANDEZ,, 271 So. 3d 1124 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . trial court's authority to unilaterally impose a downward departure sentence under sections 921.002 and 921.0026 . . .

JAMES, v. STATE, 264 So. 3d 982 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. . . .

SERNA, v. STATE, 264 So. 3d 999 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . there are mitigating circumstances such as those set forth in the downward departure statute ( section 921.0026 . . .

COMPERE, v. STATE, 262 So. 3d 819 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Section 921.0026, Florida Statutes (2018), entitled "Mitigating Circumstances," enumerates the circumstances . . .

STRONG, v. STATE, 263 So. 3d 199 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . At this later hearing, Strong's counsel very briefly argued one statutory ground under section 921.0026 . . . See § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . . like here, the defendant asserted one ground for a downward departure sentence, unrelated to section 921.0026 . . .

E. WALLACE, v. STATE, 257 So. 3d 1054 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(l ); § 958.04, Fla. Stat. (2016). . . .

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE- REGULAR- CYCLE REPORT., 265 So. 3d 494 (Fla. 2018)

. . . Circumstances or factors that can be considered include, but are not limited to, those listed in subsection 921.0026 . . .

GREEN, v. STATE, 257 So. 3d 474 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . In a written motion, the defendant sought a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026( . . . 2)(c) and section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2017). . . . There was evidence which could support a departure sentence based on section 921.0026(2)(c). Dr. . . . Pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(c), the trial court may impose a downward departure sentence where the . . . Pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(d), the trial court may impose a downward departure sentence where the . . .

STATE v. SISCO,, 254 So. 3d 1139 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . sentence, as well as the trial court's determination that there was "domination," according to section 921.0026 . . . Instead, the trial court found that Sisco qualified for a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . And I am quite convinced by the requisite degree that what does apply here -- let me find it -- is 921.0026 . . . Specifically, the Court finds that a downward departure is warranted pursuant to Section 921.0026(1)( . . . See § 921.0026(2)(g), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .

MCCRAY, v. STATE, 256 So. 3d 878 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . disorder (unrelated to substance abuse or addiction) and his amenability to treatment, pursuant to section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. HOLLINGER,, 253 So. 3d 1207 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . The trial court found that Hollinger met the criteria for a downward departure under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. RIVERA,, 249 So. 3d 1314 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . adjudication is justified under the circumstances in accordance with the factors set out in section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. ROGERS,, 250 So. 3d 821 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Section 921.0026(2)(j) of the Florida Statutes (2017) authorizes the imposition of a departure sentence . . . See § 921.0026(2)(e), Fla. Stat. (2017). . . . Section 921.0026(2)(d) of the Florida Statutes (2017) authorizes the imposition of a departure sentence . . .

STATE v. LACKEY,, 248 So. 3d 1222 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . One potential valid reason, section 921.0026(2)(e), Florida Statutes, provides that a downward departure . . . to justify a departure beneath the Criminal Punishment Code's minimum prison sentence under section 921.0026 . . .

CASTILLO, v. STATE, 244 So. 3d 1098 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . the sentencing hearing, the defendant moved for a downward departure, primarily pursuant to section 921.0026 . . .

FUSS, v. STATE, 240 So. 3d 777 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . years, arguing that the trial court erred by denying his motion for downward departure under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. SHINE Jr., 274 So. 3d 1135 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See § 921.0026 Fla. Stat. (2014) ; State v. Pita, 54 So.3d 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) ; State v. . . .

STATE v. HAWKINS, Jr., 225 So. 3d 943 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Section 921.0026(2) contains a list of valid reasons, also called mitigating factors or circumstances . . . and the trial court may impose a downward departure, sentence for reasons not .delineated in section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. JOHNSON, Jr., 224 So. 3d 877 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . “[T]he trial court can impose a downward departure sentence for reasons not delineated in section 921.0026 . . .

LEE, v. STATE, 223 So. 3d 342 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . .” § 921.0026(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2013). . . . Statutory Mitigator Section 921.0026(2)(d) allows for a departure sentence when a defendant proves by . . .

KOVALSKY, v. STATE, 220 So. 3d 1192 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . During sentencing, Appellant moved for a downward departure pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida . . . whatever [the expert] testified to was a sufficient basis for departing from the guidelines pursuant to 921.0026 . . . Section 921.0026, Florida Statutes, addresses the mitigating circumstances in which • a court may. award . . . whatever [the expert] testified to was a sufficient basis for departing from the guidelines pursuant to 921.0026 . . . In fact, it holds the opposite: "the plain language of subsection 921.0026(2)(d) does not require the . . .

ROMANS, v. STATE, 221 So. 3d 647 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse ” § 921.0026 . . . denial of a departure on the grounds that he “cooperated with the state to resolve” another offense. § 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. IMBER,, 223 So. 3d 1070 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . basis that the victim was a “willing participant” in the theft of his own money pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . prohibited unless there are circumstances or factors that reasonably justify the downward departure.” §. 921.0026 . . . is if the “victim was an initiator, willing participant, aggressor, or provoker of the incident.” § 921.0026 . . . was a “willing participant” in the, grand theft and money laundering incidents pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . Imber’s theft of his own money pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(f). . . .

STATE v. MILICI,, 219 So. 3d 117 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . We first address the trial court’s departure under section 921.0026(2)(j). . . . Ayers, 901 So.2d 942, 945 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (quoting § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . Finally, we address the trial court’s departure under section 921.0026(2)(e). . . . “For section 921.0026(2)(c) to apply, it is not enough that a defendant simply not know that what he . . . See § 921.0026(2)(c), Fla. Stat. . . .

BUTNER, v. STATE, 217 So. 3d 1162 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . imposed the same sentences if it had understood that it had the discretion to depart under [section 921.0026 . . .

MARTINEZ, v. STATE, 216 So. 3d 734 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(a), Fla. . . .

STATE v. WILEY,, 213 So. 3d 1108 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . The court relied on section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2018), which authorizes a downward departure . . .

MUNOZ, v. STATE, 212 So. 3d 1146 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . that the court erred in rejecting his request for a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . In Chubbuck, our Supreme Court considered “whether subsection 921.0026(2)(d) requires the defendant to . . . The court concluded: [T]he plain language of subsection 921.0026(2)(d) does not require the defendant . . . Accordingly, a defendant who is requesting a downward departure sentence pursuant to subsection 921.0026 . . .

BYNES, v. STATE, 212 So. 3d 1134 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . circumstances or factors that reasonably justify the mitigation of the sentence in accordance with s. 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. WILEY,, 210 So. 3d 658 (Fla. 2017)

. . . trial court adjudicated [Wiley] guilty and imposed a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . taking her prescription, and I don’t believe ... that is the type of specialized treatment that [section 921.0026 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. GRACZYK,, 206 So.3d 157 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . intended to require unavailability of specialized treatment in the DOC as an element of subsection 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. SAWYER,, 205 So. 3d 866 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Section 921.0026(2)(m), Florida Statutes, which limits a trial court’s ability to impose a downward departure . . . Section 921.0026(2)(m), Florida Statutes, allows the trial court to impose a downward departure sentence . . . See § 921.0026(2)(m), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .

LAWTON, v. STATE, 207 So.3d 359 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2015), Lawton . . . the record shows that the only statutory ground Lawton pursued was based on “physical disability.” § 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. PLATT,, 203 So. 3d 194 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . of adjudication is reasonably justified based on the circumstances or factors set forth in section 921.0026 . . . See § 921.0026(2)®, (2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . . . § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat.; State v. Bosompem, 146 So.3d 98, 100 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). . . . As for cooperation, courts have found that a downward departure is warranted under section 921.0026(2 . . .

FRASER, v. STATE, 201 So. 3d 847 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 921.0026(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2014). This was error. Little v. . . .

BELLAMY, v. STATE, 199 So. 3d 480 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .” § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2011). . . . For section 921.0026(2)(j) to be applicable, all three elements must be present: (1) the offense was . . . instant case, the trial court’s refusal to consider remorse was contrary to the plain language of section 921.0026 . . . VanBebber, 848 So.2d 1046 (Fla.2003), which held that section 921.0026(2)Cj) is available for all felonies . . .

STATE v. Q. JOHNSON,, 197 So. 3d 1268 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . relying on defense counsel’s argument, offered Johnson two years of probation on the basis of section 921.0026 . . .

WALLACE, v. STATE, 197 So. 3d 1204 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .” § 921.0026(1), Fla. Stat. (2012). . . . Section 921.0026(2) lists mitigating factors “under which a departure from the lowest permissible sentence . . . is reasonably justified.” § 921.0026(2), Fla. . . . an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse.” § 921.0026 . . . criminal history alone precludes the finding that an offense was ‘an isolated incident’ under section 921.0026 . . .

B. BAILEY, Jr. v. STATE, 199 So. 3d 304 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . “A departure sentence is prohibited unless there are mitigating factors as provided in s. 921.0026 which . . . The court based its decision on subsection 921.0026(2)(e), which permits a downward departure sentence . . . equivalent, the “Drunken Cabbie” — argument, that the sentence imposed may be affirmed under subsection 921.0026 . . .

L. LANDRUM, v. STATE, 192 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 2016)

. . . See §■ 921.0026(2)(f) and (j), Fla. Stat. (2004). . . . the time of the offense the defendant was too young to appreciate the consequences of the offense.” § 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. CENTENO, Jr., 192 So. 3d 705 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .” § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. . . . must be shown in order to establish the existence of the mitigating circumstance listed in section 921.0026 . . . conviction for the same crime, indicated crimes were not isolated incidents within the meaning of section 921.0026 . . .

ALFONSO- ROCHE, v. STATE, 199 So. 3d 941 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 921.0026(1), Fla. Stat. (2014). . . . Section 921.0026(2) sets forth a nonexclusive list of mitigating circumstances that might justify a valid . . .

SENGER, v. STATE, 200 So. 3d 137 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . adjudication of guilt based on circumstances or factors in accordance with those set forth in section 921.0026 . . . extent Senger is arguing that because the court separately. found sufficient grounds under section 921.0026 . . .

NOEL, v. STATE v., 191 So. 3d 370 (Fla. 2016)

. . . where “[t]he need for payment of restitution to the victim outweighs the need for a prison sentence,” § 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. JOHNSON,, 193 So. 3d 32 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Shamichael Juliet Johnson’s confession satisfied the statutory ground for cooperation, pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . The statutory mitigating factor of cooperation is found in section 921.0026(i), Florida Statutes (2011 . . . found that Johnson’s confession satisfied the statutory ground for cooperation, pursuant to section 921.0026 . . .

WALKER, v. STATE, 193 So. 3d 946 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . sentence is prohibited unless there are mitigating circumstances or factors present as provided in s.921.0026 . . .

STATE v. BROWNE,, 187 So. 3d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Section 921.0026(2), Florida Statutes (2015), sets forth a list of mitigating circumstances that permit . . . that Appellee was too young to appreciate the consequences of the offense, is found on that list. § 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. PEREZ- DIAZ,, 189 So. 3d 896 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . this is not a permissible basis for departure under our existing statutory sentencing scheme. .Section 921.0026 . . . review under chapter 924, but the extent of downward departure is not subject, to appellate review. § 921.0026 . . . However, section 921.0026(1) expressly provides that “the extent of the downward departure is not subject . . . ' Yet such review by an appellate court is expressly prohibited by section 921.0026(1). . . . Because the review of the extent of the downward departure is prohibited under section 921.0026(1), this . . . incident for which he has shown remorse, which is a statutory mitigating factor pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . did not support a downward departure based on the statutory mitigating factor set forth in section 921.0026 . . . ANALYSIS Section 921.0026(2), of the Florida Statutes (2013), sets forth a non-exclusive list of mitigating . . . Mitigation of a first degree murder sentence is riot permitted. § 921.0026, Fla. . . . Stat. (2013) (providing that section 921.0026 does not apply' to any capital felony). . . .

STATE v. CLEVELAND,, 185 So. 3d 1290 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . So.2d 765, 765 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (holding in order to qualify for a valid departure under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. KNIGHT,, 182 So. 3d 887 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 921.0026(m), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .

STATE v. WHEELER,, 180 So. 3d 1117 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(e), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . . finding, Wheeler did not cooperate with the State to resolve the current offense or any other offense. § 921.0026 . . . However, section 921.0026(2)(m) & (3), Florida Statutes (2014), provides that, unless a defendant scores . . .

STATE v. WILEY,, 179 So. 3d 481 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . trial court adjudicated Ap-pellee guilty and imposed a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . taking her prescription, and I don’t believe ... that is the type of specialized treatment that [section 921.0026 . . .

RUDD, v. STATE, 177 So. 3d 1015 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . § 921.0026(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2013); see Childers v. . . . 170, 171-72 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (explaining that defense counsel sought a downward departure under § 921.0026 . . .

H. ROWE, v. STATE, 175 So. 3d 947 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Appellant challenges the denial of his motion for a downward departure sentence brought pursuant to section 921.0026 . . .

M. RANKIN, v. STATE, 174 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . .” § 921.0026(2)©, Fla. Stat. (2013) (emphasis added). . . .

STATE v. PINCKNEY,, 173 So. 3d 1139 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . there was insufficient evidence that the victim provoked the incident within the meaning of section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. REDDEN, Sr., 173 So. 3d 1117 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Appellee by the trial court, arguing that no valid legal basis existed for the departure under section 921.0026 . . . The trial court did not address the State’s objection, instead concluding: Pursuant to 921.0026(a) — . . . The presence of all three elements of section 921.0026(2)(j) is necessary to justify a downward departure . . . We need not address the other two elements of section 921.0026(2)(j). . . . The subsection actually referenced by the trial court is section 921.0026(2)©, Florida Statutes (2013 . . .

CHILDERS, v. STATE, 171 So. 3d 170 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Defense counsel sought a downward departure sentence in part pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida . . . Under section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2013), a defendant seeking a downward departure sentence . . . of whether he presented sufficient evidence to support a downward departure sentence under section 921.0026 . . . found that Appellant' failed to present sufficient evidence of the necessary elements under section 921.0026 . . . If the trial court determines on remand that Appellant proved the elements of section 921.0026(2)(d) . . .

STATE v. BURT,, 183 So. 3d 1117 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . The court explained that it was departing downward pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(j), Florida Statutes . . . Under the plain language of section 921.0026(2)(j), all three elements — lack of sophistication, isolated . . . prior offenses preclude the finding that the current offenses were isolated, as required by section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. LINDSAY,, 163 So. 3d 721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . §§ 921.0026(1), 921.00265(1), Fla. Stat. (2008); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.704(d)(27). . . . Section 921.0026(2) sets forth a nonexclusive list of mitigating factors under which a departure from . . . the lowest permissible sentence is reasonably justified. § 921.0026(2), Fla. . . . See § 921.0026(2)©, Fla. Stat. (2013). . . . See § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2013). . . .

GIBBS, v. STATE, 163 So. 3d 732 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Consequently, the trial judge determined that Gibbs established grounds for a downward departure under section 921.0026 . . .

CAMACHO, v. STATE, 164 So. 3d 45 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2012). In support of this theory, Mr. . . . See § 921.0026(2)(d) (authorizing a downward departure where the “defendant requires specialized treatment . . . This is true even if section 921.0026(2)(d) does not provide a basis for departure and even though a . . . State, 884 So.2d 220 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (reversing for resentencing in a case involving section 921.0026 . . . Under section 921.0026(3), "[e]xcept as provided in paragraph (2)(m), the defendant’s substance abuse . . .

PARKERSON, v. STATE, 163 So. 3d 683 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . In a motion for downward departure, the defendant asserted that, pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(d), . . .

HARRELL, v. STATE, 162 So. 3d 1128 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . intended to require unavailability of specialized treatment in the DOC as an element of subsection 921.0026 . . .

GUEVARA- VILCA, v. STATE, 189 So. 3d 815 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Cf., e.g., § 921.0026(c), (d), Fla. . . .

S. HARDIE, a k a v. STATE, 162 So. 3d 297 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . the church’s need for restitution outweighed the need for his imprisonment as allowed for by section 921.0026 . . . Section 921.0026 lists several circumstances under which a downward departure sentence may be appropriate . . . In particular, section 921.0026(2)(e) states that the court may depart downward when “[t]he need for . . . In regard to section 921.0026(2)(e) specifically, the defendant must present “some evidence of the victims . . .

STATE v. A. KUTZ,, 157 So. 3d 380 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . At sentencing, she argued for sentence mitigation based on section 921.0026(2)(e), (j), and (m), Florida . . . drug court program and is otherwise qualified to participate in the program as part of the sentence. § 921.0026 . . . Ignoring the portion of • section 921.0026(2)(m) that requires the defendant be a candidate for a drug . . .

KINSEY, v. STATE, 153 So. 3d 989 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . his necessary, specialized treatment in order to receive a downward departure sentence under section 921.0026 . . .

DIXON, v. STATE, 154 So. 3d 463 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . his necessary, specialized treatment in order to receive a downward departure sentence under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. HUDSON,, 153 So. 3d 375 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . At sentencing, the trial court indicated that it was departing downward pursuant to section 921.0026( . . . to come into the category in my mind, okay, that doesn’t obviate some section (j) of Florida Statute 921.0026 . . . departure was not proper under subsection (j), the record supports a downward departure under section 921.0026 . . .

LITTLE, v. STATE, 152 So. 3d 770 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . the sentencing hearing, defense counsel was seeking a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . review under chapter 924, but the extent of downward departure is not subject to appellate review. § 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. HODGES,, 151 So. 3d 531 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . . § 921.0026(1), Fla. Stat. (2012). . . . Section 921.0026(2) provides a non-exclusive list of mitigating circumstances for a valid downward departure . . . While a trial court may depart for a reason other than those set forth in section 921.0026(2), it may . . .

STATE v. HENDERSON,, 152 So. 3d 49 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . At resentencing, Henderson again argued for a downward departure, this time based upon section 921.0026 . . . an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse.” § 921.0026 . . . See § 921.0026, Fla. Stat. . . . Section 921.0026(j) cannot, and should not, be read to mean that as long as the defendant has never committed . . .

STATE v. MONTGOMERY,, 155 So. 3d 1182 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . s need for restitution is a valid reason for departure from the sentencing guidelines under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. ROBINSON,, 149 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . At the same time, the Court has to be mindful of the provisions of chapter 921.0026 and the factors that . . . sentence is prohibited unless there are mitigating circumstances or factors present as provided in s. 921.0026 . . . circumstances or factors that reasonably justify the mitigation of the sentence in accordance with s. 921.0026 . . . (2). § 921.0026(1), Fla. . . . Id.; see also § 921.0026(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2011). No such plea bargain existed in this case. . . .

STATE v. DANIELS,, 149 So. 3d 1175 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2011); State v. Laperreri, 710 So.2d 119, 120 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). . . .

STATE v. BOSOMPEM,, 146 So. 3d 98 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . .” § 921.0026(2)0'), Fla. Stat. (2011). . . . Intoxication, however, cannot be used to justify a downward departure. § 921.0026(3), Fla. . . . Thompson, 844 So.2d 814, 815 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (“Any departure based on [section 921.0026(2)(j) ] must . . .

HO YEAON SEO, v. STATE, 143 So. 3d 1189 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . cross-appeal, the State contends that the trial court erred in imposing a downward departure under section 921.0026 . . .

N. NAPOLES, v. STATE, 162 So. 3d 58 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . entered an open plea and moved for a downward departure based on several mitigating factors under section 921.0026 . . . In particular, Ñapóles relied on section 921.0026(2)(d), which provides that a departure is reasonably . . . In Chubbuck, we held that the plain language of section 921.0026(2)(d) does not require a defendant to . . . intended to require unavailability of specialized treatment in the DOC as an element of subsection 921.0026 . . .

MITCHELL, v. STATE, 147 So. 3d 93 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . inability to treat his physical condition, his request for a downward departure pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . Chubbuck, 141 So.3d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 2014) (citing § 921.0026). . . .

STATE v. KELLEHER,, 142 So. 3d 958 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Pursuant to section 921.0026(2)©, Florida Statutes (2011), a court can impose a sentence below the Criminal . . . sentence for an unsophisticated, isolated offense for which the defendant has shown remorse under section 921.0026 . . . Butler, 787 So.2d 47, 48 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (citing § 921.0026(2)(j), Fla. Stat. (2000); State v. . . . Kelleher’s] criminal history is so extensive that it precludes a downward departure sentence under section 921.0026 . . . eighteen prior convictions including several forcible felonies, a downward departure under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. DAVIS,, 141 So. 3d 1230 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . I respectfully dissent from the decision to affirm Davis’ downward departure sentence under section 921.0026 . . . For a downward departure to be valid under section 921.0026(2)©, the trial court must find based upon . . . substantial evidence, the trial court erred in imposing a downward departure sentence under section 921.0026 . . . I agree with majority that section 921.0026(2)(f) ⅛ not a valid basis for a downward departure under . . . Murphy, 124 So.3d 323, 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (holding that section 921.0026(2X0 is not applicable when . . . .” § 921.0026(2)©, (j), Fla. Stat. (2012). . . .

STATE v. CHUBBUCK,, 141 So. 3d 1163 (Fla. 2014)

. . . This case pertains to subsection 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2009), which authorizes a trial court . . . The Fourth District, sitting en banc, held that the plain language of subsection 921.0026(2)(d) does . . . ANALYSIS The question before us is whether subsection 921.0026(2)(d) requires the defendant to prove . . . Section 921.0026(2) sets out a non-exclusive list of mitigating circumstances under which a downward . . . Abrams was decided in February 1998, which was prior to the effective date of subsection 921.0026(2)( . . . I concur in the majority’s conclusion that the plain language of subsection 921.0026(2)(d), does not . . . competent, substantial evidence that the defendant has satisfied all that is necessary under subsection 921.0026 . . .

BARNHILL, v. STATE, 140 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . treatment for a mental disorder that is unrelated to substance abuse or addiction, pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . ), Florida Statutes (2010), as well as on his cooperation with law enforcement, pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . As the motion related to section 921.0026(2)(d), Barnhill depended heavily on a forensic psychological . . . As Barnhill’s motion related to section 921.0026(2)®, Barnhill pointed out that he truthfully answered . . . Barnhill also raised the issue of whether, under section 921.0026(2)(d), a defendant must still establish . . .

ROCHESTER, v. STATE, 140 So. 3d 973 (Fla. 2014)

. . . precludes a trial court from imposing a downward departure sentence if the statutory criteria of sections 921.0026 . . . trial court had the discretion to impose in consideration of the facts of the crime pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . Prior to sentencing, Rochester filed a motion for a downward departure sentence, pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . an unsophisticated manner and was an isolated incident for which the defendant has shown remorse.” § 921.0026 . . . or to sentencing, Rochester filed a motion seeking a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . Section 921.0026, Florida Statutes (2008), "applies to any felony offense, except any capital felony, . . .

STATE v. ROBINSON,, 138 So. 3d 1225 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Section 921.0026(1), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that a sentence less severe than the lowest permissible . . .

STATE v. B. McELROY,, 145 So. 3d 866 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See § 921.0026(l)(d), Fla. Stat. (2011). . . . problem in this case is that McEl-roy did not seek a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026 . . . The trial court’s finding that a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026(l)(d) was appropriate . . . McElroy did seek a downward departure based on section 921.0026(2)(j), which permits a departure where . . .

KINSEY, v. STATE, 135 So. 3d 424 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Kinsey sought a downward departure sentence under section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2013), asserting . . . courts as to what a defendant must establish in order to qualify for a downward departure under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. A. FUREMAN,, 161 So. 3d 403 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . The lower court downwardly departed pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(j), Florida Statutes (2011), on the . . . The lower court downwardly departed pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(j), Florida Statutes (2011), which . . . See § 921.0026(2)(f), Fla. . . . Randall addressed only whether the lower court relied on a valid reason contained within section 921.0026 . . . combined under a totality of the circumstances analysis to satisfy one mitigating factor under section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. MONTANEZ,, 133 So. 3d 1151 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . I recognize that under section 921.0026(1), Florida Statutes (2011), a downward departure sentence is . . . factors to be considered for a downward departure “are not limited to ... those listed” in section 921.0026 . . . that “the trial court can impose a downward departure sentence for reasons not delineated in section 921.0026 . . . Stat. 921.0026 as the [defendant was experiencing great difficulty in his personal life due to his divorce . . . Section 921.0026(1), Florida Statutes (2011), provides: A downward departure from the lowest permissible . . . Mitigating factors to be considered include, but are not limited to, those listed in subsection (2). 921.0026 . . . made him more susceptible to substance abuse”—is not one of the mitigating factors listed in section 921.0026 . . . However, “the trial court can impose a downward departure sentence for reasons not delineated in section 921.0026 . . .

STATE v. DAVIS,, 133 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . The defense argued that the statutory basis for the downward departure was section 921.0026(2)(d), Florida . . . Section 921.0026(2)(d) further provides that mitigating circumstances include those in which “[t]he defendant . . . Davis’ need for "specialized treatment for a mental disorder that is unrelated to substance abuse[J” § 921.0026 . . .

DIXON, v. STATE, 128 So. 3d 972 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . See § 921.0026(2)(d), Fla. Stat. . . .

HERNANDEZ, v. STATE, 135 So. 3d 352 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . See §§ 921.0024(2), 921.0026, Fla. Stat. (2011). . . .