History
  • No items yet
midpage
Highsmith v. State
522 So. 2d 340
Fla.
1988
Check Treatment
BARKETT, Justice.

We have for review Highsmith v. State, 508 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), affirming petitioner’s convictions and sentences and certifying the same question set out in VanTassell v. State, 498 So.2d 649 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), quashed, 512 So.2d 181 (Fla. 1987), as a question of great public importance. The certified question is:

Does a trial court’s statement, made at the time of departure from the sentencing guidelines, that it would depart for any one of the reasons given, regardless of whether both valid and invalid reasons are found on review, satisfy the standard set forth in Albritton v. State [476 So.2d 150, (Fla.1985) ]?

512 So.2d at 182.

We answered the question in the negative in Griffis v. State, 509 So.2d 1104 (Fla.1987). Accordingly, we quash the decision below and remand to the district court for review in light of our decision in Grif-fis.

It is so ordered.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Highsmith v. State
Court Name: Supreme Court of Florida
Date Published: Jan 28, 1988
Citation: 522 So. 2d 340
Docket Number: No. 70913
Court Abbreviation: Fla.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.