Summary
In Sumler v. State, 506 So.2d 1144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), we determined that in departing from the recommended sentencing range established by the Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.701 sentencing guidelines the trial court had relied upon both permissible and impermissible reasons.
Summary of this case from Sumler v. StateOpinion
Nos. BL-355, BN-360.
May 8, 1987.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Escambia County, John T. Parnham, J.
Michael E. Allen, Public Defender and Kathleen Stover, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Henri C. Cawthon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
Sophia Sumler appeals the departure sentence based upon five reasons given by the trial court in sentencing her for aggravated child abuse and for child abuse, following revocation of probation. We find the only valid reasons to be the second and fourth reasons when they are considered together. That reason is that appellant was on probation for child abuse when she abused her physically helpless 15 month-old child. We find this to be valid as it refers to the character of appellant's conduct for which probation was being revoked. State v. Pentaude, 500 So.2d 526 (Fla. 1987). However, we are unable to say the trial court would have departed to the extent it did based upon the valid reasons alone. Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1985).
The case is therefore REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.
THOMPSON and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.