Legal Opinion

Zinnermon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 21, 1987No. 86-294PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Appellant attacks both his judgment and sentence in this appeal. We affirm the judgment. However, we find merit in the point attacking the sentence.

The trial court exceeded the guidelines for the sole reason that appellant was an habitual offender. Subsequent to the sentencing herein, the Florida Supreme Court decided Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863 (Fla.1986), holding that a departure based on habitual offender status is invalid.

*717Consequently, we reverse the sentence herein and remand for resentencing within the guidelines. Otherwise, affirmed.

DANAHY, C.J., and CAMPBELL and THREADGILL, JJ.,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Whitehead v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1986

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Zinnermon v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API