Case Name: Alan TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1988-01-21
Citations: 518 So. 2d 977
Docket Number: No. 87-698
Parties: Alan TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: SHARP, C.J., and ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 518
Pages: 977–978

Head Matter:
Alan TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 87-698.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Jan. 21, 1988.
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Nancye R. Crouch, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and W. Brian Bayly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is the second time this case has been before this court on appeal from a departure sentence. See Taylor v. State, 502 So.2d 24 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Again there is no written statement from the trial court delineating the reasons for departure. It is reversible error to impose a departure sentence under the sentencing guidelines without an accompanying written statement delineating reasons for departure. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)ll.; State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985). The defendant must now be resentenced within the recommended guidelines range because the original reason for departure, the defendant's habitual offender status, was invalid. Shull v. Dugger, 515 So.2d 748 (Fla.1987). Accordingly, we vacate the defendant's sentence and remand this case for imposition of a sentence within the recommended guidelines range.
SENTENCE VACATED; CAUSE REMANDED.
SHARP, C.J., and ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur.