Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ewell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 22, 2003No. 5D02-3067Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

SHARP, W. J.,

concurring in part; dissenting in part.

I agree with the majority opinion that the record does not support the trial court’s upward departure sentence based on its finding of an escalating pattern of criminal activity. The judge stated that Ewell had committed fraudulent use of medical reports to facilitate criminal activity. This finding was completely unsupported by the evidence and could only have been premised on the judge’s disbelief of Ewell’s medical testimony.1

However, I respectfully disagree with the majority opinion that Ewell had the ability to pay her restitution. The…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lynom v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002
  2. Robinson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000
  3. Thomas v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000
  4. King v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002
  5. Hartzog v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API