Case Name: Leroy STANLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1987-04-09
Citations: 507 So. 2d 1131
Docket Number: No. 86-946
Parties: Leroy STANLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: ORFINGER, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 507
Pages: 1131–1133

Head Matter:
Leroy STANLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 86-946.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
April 9, 1987.
Rehearing Denied June 2, 1987.
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Michael S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joseph N. D’Achille, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
COBB, Judge.
Stanley was convicted of violating section 893.13(l)(e), Florida Statutes (1983), which provides that possession of cannabis in an amount over 20 grams and not over 100 pounds constitutes a third-degree felony. The trial judge entered a departure sentence based on quantity — the fact that Stanley possessed 99 pounds of cannabis. If the amount had exceeded 100 pounds, the offense would have been elevated to a first-degree felony. § 893.135(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (1983).
As pointed out by Judge Thompson in his dissent in Mitchell v. State, 458 So.2d 10, 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), review denied, 464 So.2d 556 (Fla.1985), "neither the guidelines nor the statute making the possession of cannabis a criminal offense provide for any distinction between possession of 20 grams and 100 pounds." For the trial court to impose a heavier penalty based on variances between those two figures is an invasion of the province of the legislature. Seastrand v. State, 474 So.2d 908 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), relied upon by the state, is distinguishable in that it did not concern statutory ranges of quantity of a proscribed substance. We reverse the sentence and certify conflict with Mitchell.
We also reverse the trial court's imposition of costs against appellant on the ground that the statute authorizing it became effective July 1, 1985, eight months after Stanley committed the offense and was charged therefor. We have repeatedly held that this statute cannot be applied retroactively.
REVERSED.
ORFINGER, J., concurs.
SHARP, J., dissents with opinion.
. Stanley was charged by information on November 21, 1984.
. Gordon v. State, 497 So.2d 661 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Bennett v. State, 495 So.2d 239 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Miller v. State, 492 So.2d 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Fletcher v. State, 491 So.2d 354 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 500 So.2d 545 (Fla.1986); Yost v. State, 489 So.2d 131 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986).