From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chudeusz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jun 11, 1987
508 So. 2d 418 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Opinion

No. 86-1460.

May 7, 1987. Rehearing Denied June 11, 1987.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Walter Komanski, J.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender and Michael S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

David M. Chudeusz, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee and Paula C. Coffman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.


This appeal is submitted with an Anders brief, and we agree that no trial errors are demonstrated.

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

Defendant was convicted on Count I of attempted trafficking in excess of 100 pounds of cannabis, a second degree felony. On Count II, defendant was convicted of conspiracy to traffic in excess of 100 pounds of cannabis, a first degree felony. § 893.135(4), Fla. Stat. (1985). This statute requires that a person convicted of such conspiracy be punished "as if he had actually committed such prohibited act." Therefore, under the conspiracy conviction, it was mandatory that defendant be fined $25,000 and be imprisoned for a minimum period of three years. § 893.135(1)(a)1. State v. Niemcow, 505 So.2d 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). The trial court correctly imposed the $25,000 fine, but incorrectly imposed it on Count I where it is not required instead of on Count II, where it is. Defendant's five year concurrent sentences of imprisonment to be followed by five years of probation are not departure sentences because the incarcerative portion is within the recommended guidelines range, and the combined period of incarceration and probation does not exceed the maximum statutory penalty for either crime. See McDowell v. State, 491 So.2d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701, Committee Note (d)(12). The convictions are affirmed. The sentences are vacated and the cause is remanded for entry of corrected sentences. The defendant need not be present at resentencing.

Convictions AFFIRMED.

Sentences VACATED and REMANDED.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and COBB, J., concur.


Summaries of

Chudeusz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jun 11, 1987
508 So. 2d 418 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)
Case details for

Chudeusz v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID MICHAEL CHUDEUSZ, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Jun 11, 1987

Citations

508 So. 2d 418 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Citing Cases

Thrasher v. State

Millard, 503 So.2d at 940. Accord Chudeusz v. State, 508 So.2d 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Appellant in the…

Suarez v. State

Thus, while the trial court correctly imposed a $50,000 fine on Suarez, such was not properly reflected in…