From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Karliss v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Nov 6, 1985
477 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Opinion

No. 84-660.

November 6, 1985.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Lucie County, Royce R. Lewis, J.

Jeffrey H. Garland, Port St. Lucie, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joan Fowler Rossin, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


The trial court erred in departing from the sentencing guidelines (the conviction was for grand theft), based on these two challenged reasons:

1. Deterrence. This was error based on Williams v. State, 462 So.2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).

2. Defendant used his fiduciary position of trust to execute these particular offenses. This was error based on Mischler v. State, 458 So.2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).

Although other reasons were assigned we, applying the standard found in Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1985), reverse and remand for resentencing.

We have reviewed the several other points asserted on appeal and find no reversible error.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

LETTS, DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Karliss v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Nov 6, 1985
477 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)
Case details for

Karliss v. State

Case Details

Full title:STACEY M. KARLISS, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Nov 6, 1985

Citations

477 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Citing Cases

Massard v. State

As we have previously held, deterrence is not a valid reason for departure from the guidelines. Karliss v.…