From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Love v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Nov 21, 1990
569 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

Opinion

No. 90-911.

November 21, 1990.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Johns County; Richard G. Weinberg, Judge.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Glen P. Gifford, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Anthony J. Golden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.


Phillip Love appeals his sentence alleging that the trial court improperly multiplied by two the thirty-six points shown on the Category 4 score sheet form for legal constraint. The trial court chose the multiplier of two since Love had committed two new offenses while he was on probation. We affirm. Flowers v. State, 567 So.2d 1055 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Walker v. State, 546 So.2d 764 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).

We acknowledge that in Flowers use of the multiplier was certified to the supreme court as a question of great public importance, and we again certify the question:

DO FLORIDA'S UNIFORM SENTENCING GUIDELINES REQUIRE THAT LEGAL CONSTRAINT POINTS BE ASSESSED FOR EACH OFFENSE COMMITTED WHILE UNDER LEGAL CONSTRAINT?

AFFIRMED.

COWART and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Love v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Nov 21, 1990
569 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)
Case details for

Love v. State

Case Details

Full title:PHILLIP LOVE, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Nov 21, 1990

Citations

569 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

Citing Cases

Shiel v. State

DAUKSCH, Judge. We affirm the conviction and sentence of appellant and certify the following question of…

Love v. State

OVERTON, Justice. These consolidated petitions seek review of Love v. State, 569 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 5th DCA…