From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peters v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 25, 1991
585 So. 2d 511 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 90-2289.

September 25, 1991.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Lucie County; Thomas J. Walsh, Jr., Acting Circuit Judge.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Cherry Grant, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Melvina Racey Flaherty, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


In this criminal case, Peters, a juvenile, appeals from the sentence which imposed adult sanctions without first addressing the criteria set forth in section 39.111(7), Florida Statutes (1989).

Peters was tried by a jury and found guilty of three felonies. The trial court ordered and received a predisposition report as required by section 39.111(7)(a). However, the judge failed to address the mandatory criteria of section 39.111(7)(c) in announcing his decision to sentence Peters as an adult, nor did he enter the written order required by section 39.111(7)(d).

The state concedes the error, and we accordingly reverse the sentence and remand the cause with directions to resentence Peters in accordance with the mandatory provisions of section 39.111(7)(c) and (d), Florida Statutes (1989).

LETTS and WARNER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Peters v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Sep 25, 1991
585 So. 2d 511 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

Peters v. State

Case Details

Full title:COLANDRO PETERS, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Sep 25, 1991

Citations

585 So. 2d 511 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

Peters v. State

In the previous appeal, we reversed the sentence because the trial court had failed to make factual findings…