Case ID: so2d_651/html/0699-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DAUKSCH, Judge. PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Peter DUMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 94-1686.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Jan. 20, 1995.
    Order Amending on Grant of State’s Motion for Rehearing March 17, 1995.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County; John W. Watson, III, Judge.
    James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Sean K. Ahmed, Asst. Public Defender, Day-tona Beach, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Wesley Heidt, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
   DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence. Because it was a departure from the sentencing guidelines and no reason was given for the departure, we vacate the sentence. State v. Davis, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994). The requirement to pay money to “First Step” is error. Fyler v. State, 645 So.2d 108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); McLeod v. State, 645 So.2d 116 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Sweet v. State, 644 So.2d 176 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Mittner v. State, 648 So.2d 139 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Tibero v. State, 646 So.2d 213 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Murray v. State, 647 So.2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Avallone v. State, 646 So.2d 745 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Watson v. State, 641 So.2d 432 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Macon v. State, 639 So.2d 206 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Eckenrode v. State, 638 So.2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Botts v. State, 634 So.2d 197 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). The requirement that, while on probation, he “work diligently at a lawful occupation” is error. Armstrong v. State, 620 So.2d 1120 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).

SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.

COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We grant the state’s motion for rehearing and amend the last sentence of our opinion issued on January 20,1995 to read as follows: The requirement that, while on probation, he “work diligently at a lawful occupation” is not error. Armstrong v. State, 620 So.2d 1120 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).

REHEARING GRANTED; OPINION AMENDED.

COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

DAUKSCH, J., dissents without opinion.