Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Kezal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 9, 2010No. 2D09-1010Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partVillanti, Judge

I fully concur in the majority’s decision to affirm the denial of a downward departure sentence pursuant to section 921.0026(2)(c). However, I respectfully dissent as to the portion of the opinion reversing Kezal’s sentence and remanding for reconsideration of the departure reason listed in subsection (2)(j) because I believe the majority misreads the trial court’s ruling on the applicability of that section. From my reading of the transcript of the entire sentencing hearing, I believe it is clear that the trial court understood that it had the authority to depart under subsection (2)(j) but…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Banks v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
  2. State v. AlonsoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API