Case ID: so2d_567/html/0047-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Daniel L. McNEAL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 88-01539.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Sept. 26, 1990.
    
      James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and Wendy Friedberg, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee and Candance Sunderland, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

The appellant contends, and the appellee agrees, that upon revocation of community control or probation, based upon a single violation, a trial court is limited under the sentencing guidelines to a one cell “bump-up.” Franklin v. State, 545 So.2d 851 (Fla.1989). Thus, the defendant’s sentence beyond the one cell “bump-up” was an unauthorized departure from the sentencing guidelines.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.