From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beverly v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 20, 1976
330 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

Opinion

No. Y-302.

April 20, 1976.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Columbia County, Samuel S. Smith, J.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and Lewis G. Carres, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Andrew W. Lindsey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.


Appellant was sentenced to prison terms without the trial judge having received and considered a presentence investigation report and recommendations from the Parole and Probation Commission. Since the record does not show that appellant had a prior felony conviction, the sentencing violated Rule 3.710, F.R.Cr.P. See Mitchum v. State, Fla.App. (1st), 292 So.2d 620 (1974), and Angel v. State, Fla.App. (1st), 305 So.2d 283 (1974). There is no contention that there was a waiver of presentence investigation as was the case in Johns v. State, Fla.App. (1st), 330 So.2d 526, opinion filed this date.

We have considered the remaining point raised by appellant and find it to be without merit. See State v. Barber, Fla., 301 So.2d 7 (1974), and Terry v. State, Fla. App. (1st), 302 So.2d 142 (1974).

The convictions are affirmed, but the sentences are reversed and vacated with directions to resentence defendant after procuring and considering a presentence investigation report pursuant to Rule 3.710, F.R.Cr.P.

RAWLS, Acting C.J., and McCORD and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Beverly v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 20, 1976
330 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)
Case details for

Beverly v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID BEVERLY, JR., APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Apr 20, 1976

Citations

330 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

Citing Cases

Wilkerson v. State

The state concedes that this was Wilkerson's first felony offense, and that the required investigation was…

Watson v. State

The record in this case establishes that appellant was over eighteen years of age, but does not show a prior…