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

Roddenberry v. State646 So. 2d 854 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995) · DCA94-0644

Court
District Court of Appeal
Decided
1995-01-04
Law cited
§ 39.059(7)
On CourtListener
PER CURIAM.

Appellant, James Roddenberry, appeals from an adult sentence rendered after he pled guilty to two counts of selling marijuana. Roddenberry was a juvenile at the time the offenses were committed. Appellant argues, and the state concedes, that the trial court erred in sentencing him as an adult without making the mandatory written factual findings concerning the suitability of adult sanctions required by section 39.059(7), Florida Statutes (1993). The importance of setting out the criteria in section 39.059(7) was recently reiterated by the Supreme Court of Florida in Troutman v. State, 630 So.2d 528 (Fla.1993).

Accordingly, appellant’s sentence is vacated and the case remanded for further proceedings.

STONE, FARMER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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