Case Name: William VALRIO, a/k/a Richard Bickers, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1997-10-09
Citations: 700 So. 2d 668
Docket Number: No. 88845
Parties: William VALRIO, a/k/a Richard Bickers, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Judges: KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 700
Pages: 668–670

Head Matter:
William VALRIO, a/k/a Richard Bickers, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 88845.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Oct. 9, 1997.
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, Andrea J. Surette, Assistant Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, for Petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Belle B. Turner, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We review State v. Valrio, 678 So.2d 452 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). We have jurisdiction under article V, § 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. We quash the decision of the district court below in light of our recent decision in Pease v. State, No. 87,571, — So.2d — , 1997 WL 618705 (Fla. Oct. 9, 1997), in which we held that a downward departure sentence may be affirmed where the trial court orally pronounced valid reasons for departure at the time of sentencing, but inadvertently failed to enter contemporaneous written reasons. Because the district court failed to affirm such a sentence in this case contrary to our holding in Pease, we quash the decision below and remand with directions that the district court affirm the trial court's downward departure sentence.
It is so ordered.
KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
GRIMES, J., dissents with an opinion in which HARDING and WELLS, JJ., concur.
. We also reject as without merit the State's alternative argument on appeal that Valrio's sentence must be reversed because the trial court's oral findings are insufficient to justify the downward departure sentence. See State v. Sachs, 526 So.2d 48 (Fla.1988) (finding that evidence establishing that defendant is no longer a threat to sociely is valid reason for departure from recommended sentence); State v. Forbes, 536 So.2d 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (finding by trial court that defendant had strong motivation to be rehabilitated and participation in drug rehabilitation program constitute valid reason for departure); see also State v. Frinks, 555 So.2d 916, 917 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).