Case ID: so2d_598/html/0334-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. STONE, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Dwight SHUH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 91-1872.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    June 3, 1992.
    Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Debra Moses Stephens, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and James J. Carney, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

We reverse appellant’s sentence and remand for resentencing and a rehearing on the suitability of imposing an adult sentence on the appellant. The trial court erred by failing to reduce to writing its decision to impose adult sanctions. E.g., Ford v. State, 576 So.2d 440 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); § 39.111(7)(d), Fla.Stat. (1989). Because they are now moot, we do not address the issues raised on appeal concerning the adequacy of the trial court’s oral findings.

LETTS and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

STONE, J., concurs specially with opinion.

STONE, Judge,

concurring specially.

I concur in the opinion and add a suggestion that on remand, the trial court address subsection (6) of the statute more specifically. In my judgment, findings based solely on the trial court’s unsubstantiated personal opinion concerning the inadequacy of H.R.S. juvenile services in the county is a patently insufficient ground for determining an individual defendant’s prospects for rehabilitation.