TERRY EUGENE DICKENS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Terry Dickens appealed his sentence, contending the trial court failed to disclose all factual material in the pre-sentence investigation (PSI) report before sentencing and improperly considered his juvenile record. The First District Court of Appeal agreed that the PSI was not fully disclosed and vacated the sentence for resentencing, but rejected the argument that considering juvenile records in sentencing was error.
The court held that the trial court violated the procedural rule requiring disclosure of all factual material in the PSI a reasonable time prior to sentencing and therefore vacated the sentence for resentencing. However, the court rejected the argument that considering juvenile records in sentencing constitutes error, as prior precedent established that while juvenile records are otherwise confidential, they are available for inclusion in PSI reports and may be considered at sentencing.
[1] A trial court commits error by failing to disclose all factual material in a pre-sentence investigation report to the defendant and the state a reasonable time prior to s…
[2] A defendant's juvenile record may be considered by the trial court during sentencing.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The trial judge shall disclose all factual material, including but not limited to the defendant's education, prior occupation, prior arrests, prior convictions, military service and the like, to the defendant and the State a reasonable time prior to sentencing.”
This establishes the mandatory disclosure requirement under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.713(b) that the trial court violated.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDickens was sentenced by the trial court. During the sentencing hearing, the judge asked Dickens about involvement with juvenile authorities, raising …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant contends that it was improper for the trial court to sentence him without informing him of all factual matters in the pre-sentence investigation (PSI) report and it was error for the trial court to consider his juvenile record in sentencing him. We agree as to the first point and vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.
During appellant’s sentencing hearing the trial judge asked him, “You were involved with the juvenile authorities quite a bit, weren’t you?” Though part of the PSI had been made available prior to the hearing, there was no mention of appellant’s juvenile record in that portion. Because of the question, appellant suspected there was undisclosed factual material and entered this appeal.
Rule 3.713(b), Fla.R.Cr.P., provides in relevant part:
“The trial judge shall disclose all factual material, including but not limited to the defendant’s education, prior occupation, prior arrests, prior convictions, military service and the like, to the defendant and the State a reasonable time prior to sentencing.”
The PSI has been made available to this court as part of the record of this case and our review of the confidential portion reveals that the rule was not complied with.
While appellant has emphasized in this appeal the possibility of the presence of factual information relating to his juvenile record, we note that there is other factual information which he did not directly contest, perhaps because he did not know about it. The other information includes alleged admissions by appellant of arrests in other jurisdictions as well as further information about the current status of a prior offense which was listed in the noneonfidential portion of the PSI. Under the rule this information, and all other factual information in the PSI, must be revealed to both the defendant and the state a reasonable time prior to sentencing. Bronson v. State, 345 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Campbell v. State, 342 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Cunningham v. State, 349 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). We hereby admonish the Department of Offender Rehabilitation to include all factual information in the non-eonfidential portion of the PSI.
Appellant’s second point, that it was error for the trial court to consider his juvenile record in sentencing, has already been rejected by this court. Bell v. State, 365 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). The error by the trial court was not in considering the juvenile record, but in not disclosing it. Bronson v. State, supra. Implicit in Bell v. State, supra, is the holding that the juvenile record, otherwise confidential under Section 39.12, Florida Statutes (1977), is available to the Department of Offender Rehabilitation for preparation of the PSI. The inclusion of this information in the noneonfidential portion of the PSI will still maintain its overall confidentiality since the PSI is revealed only to the defendant, officers of the court, and persons or agencies with a legitimate professional interest in the information. Rule 3.712, Fla.R.Crim.P. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed but the sentence is vacated and the cause remanded for resentencing with directions that all factual material contained in the PSI be disclosed a reasonable time prior to resentencing.
McCORD, C. J., and MELVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Batch v. State, 405 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…PSI) must be disclosed to a defendant a reasonable time prior to sentencing. Cunningham v. State, 349 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 362 So. 2d 1052 (Fla.1978); Campbell v. State, 342 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Dickens v. State, 368 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Although we have not been provided with a copy of the PSI in this case, the record discloses that the court refused defense counsel’s motion to review what, if any, factual information was contained in the confidential portion o…
-
S. C. H. v. State, 404 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…DCA 1976), construed Rules 3.712 and 3.713 as requiring that relevant information comprising a presentence investigation report be in written form and available to the defendant at a reasonable time before sentencing. Additionally, Dickens v. State, 368 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), held that a defendant was entitled to all non-confidential factual information contained in a pre-sentence investigation report prior to sentencing. Although Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.200(b) has yet to be judicially…
-
McCLENDON v. State, 589 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…confidential section in a PSI.2 In so concluding, however, we note that reviewing courts have reversed for resentencing where they found that the confidential section of a PSI contained factual material not revealed to the defense. Dickens v. State, 368 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Bronson v. State, 345 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Campbell v. State, 342 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). We identify two different concerns about the confidentiality of a PSI. First, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Pro…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Campbell v. State, 342 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Bronson v. State, 345 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
- Cunningham v. State, 349 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- In the Interest of M. L., 349 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Bell v. State, 365 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)