Dependency Law Finder

Florida's dependency statutes, court rules and DCF operating procedures, with the appellate opinions that apply them

data.robertlathamesq.org · All tools

Before you use this site

This site aggregates legal authorities from a variety of public sources. It is AI and human reviewed. Text processing errors can occur. Always check the information here against the official linked source.

This site is publicly available. Use for general research only. Do not submit confidential or identifiable case information.

I don't agree: show the official sources

Murphy v. State546 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989) · DCA88-1594

Court
District Court of Appeal
Decided
1989-07-27
On CourtListener
DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence of a juvenile who was given adult sanctions. It is error to sentence a juvenile as an adult if section 39.111, Florida Statutes (1987) is not complied with.

*1158Here, as in Keith v. State, 542 So.2d 440 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), the trial judge merely checked a checklist and did not comply with section 39.111(7)(d), Florida Statutes (1987). This statute requires the sentencing judge to “render a specific finding of fact and the reasons for the decision” in writing so they can be reviewed on appeal. Although we assume the sentencing judge put the checkmarks on the checklist we do not know because one check looks like another and the judge did not sign the checklist. So, it was error to fail to give written specific findings of fact and reasons for the decision to impose adult sanctions and the record cannot support a judicial action if a written action is not signed by the judge.

The sentence is quashed and this cause remanded for resentencing.

SENTENCE QUASHED; REMANDED.

DANIEL, C.J., and ORFINGER, J., concur.

Opinion text: CourtListener, Free Law Project. Not an official reporter; check the court's version before citing.