From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Mar 26, 1992
595 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1992)

Opinion

No. 78800.

March 26, 1992.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Manuel Menendez, J.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and Deborah K. Brueckheimer, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Leslie Schreiber, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for respondent.


We review Taylor v. State, 586 So.2d 503 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), in which the district court certified the same question of great public importance as we answered in Williams v. State, 594 So.2d 273 (Fla. 1992).

We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

In Williams, we held that in the case of multiple violations of probation, sentences may be bumped one cell or guideline range for each violation, but that the court may not depart from the guidelines. Because the trial court in this case departed from the guidelines solely based on Taylor's multiple violations of probation and community control, we quash the opinion below and remand for resentencing in accordance with Williams.

It is so ordered.

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


Summaries of

Taylor v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Mar 26, 1992
595 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1992)
Case details for

Taylor v. State

Case Details

Full title:WALLACE MIRRAL TAYLOR, PETITIONER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Mar 26, 1992

Citations

595 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1992)

Citing Cases

Mullins v. State

However, because he had ". . . two separate violations [the judge] bumped him up two cells into the 12-17…

Bowen v. State

Although a trial court may "bump up" a defendant's score one cell for each violation of probation or…