From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

STATE v. PINA

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 7, 1986
487 So. 2d 351 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

Summary

In Pina, a grand theft case, the trial court departed downward from the recommended guidelines sentence because the amount stolen was very close to the statutory minimum for grand theft.

Summary of this case from State v. Lisk

Opinion

No. 85-1987.

April 9, 1986. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied May 7, 1986.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Charles E. Smith, J.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert S. Jaegers, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Margaret Good, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


Michael Phillip Pina shoplifted a stereo cassette player from K-Mart. It had retail value of $145.00. He was tried and found guilty of grand theft, a third degree felony with a maximum penalty of five years.

At sentencing the trial court departed downward from the sentencing guidelines and sentenced Pina to a term of three years. Written reasons therefor were these:

Departure from the sentencing guidelines for the following reasons: (1) maximum sentence is 5 years; (2) property stolen retail value $145.00.

The state appeals and contends that Pina should have been sentenced to five years. We disagree and affirm the downward departure.

The statutory definition of the crime committed by Pina is satisfied, "if the property stolen is: (1) valued at $100.00 or more, but less than $20,000.00." Here the spread between the two figures is obviously large with the $145.00 value of the property stolen by Pina being at the bottom of the spectrum. We are of the opinion that the insignificance, relatively speaking, of the value of the item taken could constitute a clear, convincing, and sufficient reason for the trial court to depart downward from the sentencing guidelines. See State v. Villalovo a/k/a Laso, 481 So.2d 1303 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).

Affirmed.

ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

STATE v. PINA

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 7, 1986
487 So. 2d 351 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

In Pina, a grand theft case, the trial court departed downward from the recommended guidelines sentence because the amount stolen was very close to the statutory minimum for grand theft.

Summary of this case from State v. Lisk
Case details for

STATE v. PINA

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT, v. MICHAEL PHILLIP PINA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: May 7, 1986

Citations

487 So. 2d 351 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

Citing Cases

State v. Johnson

We are hard pressed to understand how property valued at $1,100 can be considered to be of minimal value.…

State v. Sinclair

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. State v. Pina, 487 So.2d 351 (Fla. 4th DCA), aff'd on other grounds, 487 So.2d 1055…