Skip to main content

Booker v. State

Citations

  • 514 So. 2d 1079
  • 12 Fla. L. Weekly 491

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • explaining that “so long as the sentence imposed is within the maximum limit set by the legislature, an appellate court is without power to review the sentence”
  • explaining that it would be an abuse of discretion to impose an upward departure sentence under the 1987 sentencing guidelines if the sentence was “so excessive as to shock the judicial conscience”
  • explaining that it would be an abuse of discretion to impose an upward departure sentence under the 1987 sentencing guidelines if the sentence was “so excessive as to shock the judicial conscience”
  • noting that, historically, “a reviewing court is powerless to interfere with the length of a sentence imposed by the trial court so long as the sentence is within the limits allowed by the relevant statute”
  • “In effect, this rule recognizes that setting forth the range within which a defendant may be sentenced is a matter of substantive law, properly within the legislative domain.”
  • “[A] reviewing court is powerless to interfere with the length of a sentence imposed by the trial court so long as the sentence is within the limits allowed by the relevant statute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ehrlich

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

44 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.