Case Name: Anthony PATINO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1994-07-01
Citations: 638 So. 2d 620
Docket Number: No. 93-00246
Parties: Anthony PATINO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 638
Pages: 620–620

Head Matter:
Anthony PATINO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 93-00246.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
July 1, 1994.
Daniel M. Hernandez of Daniel M. Hernandez, P.A., Tampa, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Johnny T. Salgado, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

Opinion:
BLUE, Judge.
Anthony Patino appeals his guidelines departure sentence, arguing that the record does not support the reasons given for the departure. We agree the record does not support the first reason, "emotional trauma to the victim." However, the record clearly supports the second reason, "escalating pattern of criminal activity." Barfield v. State, 594 So.2d 259 (Fla.1992).
From the trial judge's comments at sentencing, it is clear that even in the absence of the invalid departure reason, the judge would have departed from the guidelines on the remaining valid departure reason. Therefore, a remand for resentencing is not necessary. Nixon v. State, 572 So.2d 1336 (Fla.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 112 S.Ct. 164, 116 L.Ed.2d 128 (1991). Accordingly, we affirm the departure sentence.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.