State v. Beasley

PER CURIAM. While the departure order is inartfully drawn, the second and third reasons, read in light of the trial court’s remarks at sentencing, were intended to mean, and are sustainable under, point five of State v. McMullen, 529 So.2d 821, 823 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). See also State v. Sachs, 526 So.2d 48, 50 (Fla.1988). Affirmed.