Case ID: so2d_488/html/0099-01.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

Donald WADE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. AY-285.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    April 9, 1986.
    On Motion for Rehearing May 15, 1986.
    Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, and Glenna Joyce Reeves, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Upon reconsideration pursuant to the mandate of the Supreme Court of Florida we apply the rule in Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla.1985), and affirm the trial court’s departure from the presumptive sentencing guidelines.

Although, in this case, both valid and invalid reasons for departure were given, the State has demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that the absence of the invalid reasons would not have affected the departure sentence. Accordingly, we affirm.

BOOTH, C.J., SHIVERS, J., and TILLMAN PEARSON (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

Motion for rehearing is granted for the purpose of considering the following supplemental authorities cited by appellant:

State v. Misckler, 488 So.2d 523 (Fla.1986).
State v. Cote, 487 So.2d 1039 (Fla.1986).
Hankey v. State, 485 So.2d 827 (Fla.1986).

After consideration, we adhere to the original opinion.

BOOTH, C.J., SHIVERS, J., and TILLMAN PEARSON (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.