From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Koopman

Supreme Court of Florida
Jan 28, 1988
519 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 1988)

Opinion

No. 70588.

January 28, 1988.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Harry Lee Coe III, J.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Erica M. Raffel, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for petitioner.

Daniel M. Hernandez of Daniel M. Hernandez, P.A., Tampa, for respondent.


We accepted jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution to answer the question of great public importance certified in Koopman v. State, 507 So.2d 684, 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987):

May the quantity of drugs involved in possession or delivery of cocaine be used as a proper reason to support a valid departure from the sentencing guidelines?

In Atwaters v. State, 519 So.2d 611 (Fla. 1988), we held that the quantity of drugs involved in a crime cannot be a proper reason to support departure from the sentencing guidelines. Accordingly, we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the decision of the district court.

It is so ordered.

McDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Koopman

Supreme Court of Florida
Jan 28, 1988
519 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 1988)
Case details for

State v. Koopman

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, v. CHARLES KOOPMAN, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Jan 28, 1988

Citations

519 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 1988)

Citing Cases

State v. Robinson

Neither ground is permissible. A small amount of drugs involved as a ground for downward departure was…

State v. Braxton

Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We answered the same question in the negative in State v. Koopman, 519 So.2d…