Case ID: so2d_570/html/0349-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ulysses CRENSHAW, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 88-1497.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Oct. 16, 1990.
    On Motion for Rehearing and Certification Dec. 4, 1990.
    Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Dean A. Mitchell, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Jorge Espinosa, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
    Before HUBBART, FERGUSON and LEVY, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

We need not address the question whether admitting a 911 tape into evidence, where the victim identified the defendant as her assailant, was erroneous. The issue was not preserved for review by a specific contemporaneous objection. Castor v. State, 365 So.2d 701 (Fla.1978).

Because the trial court failed to enter written reasons in support of its departure sentence, the matter must be remanded for resentencing within the guidelines. Pope v. State, 561 So.2d 554 (Fla.1990).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING AND CERTIFICATION

PER CURIAM.

The appellant’s motion for rehearing is denied. The State’s motion to certify the question certified in Stennis v. State, 567 So.2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), is granted.

SHOULD POPE v. STATE BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY TO SENTENCES IMPOSED PRIOR TO APRIL 26, 1990?