CHARLES LEE DAVIS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1985-01-29
No. AY-264
BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., and TILLMAN PEARSON (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
463 So. 2d 398 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1985) Negative Treatment
Cited by 55 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that a third felony conviction was not sufficiently corroborated to be included in the sentencing score-sheet.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant pleaded nolo contendere to sale of marijuana and was sentenced based on three prior felony convictions. Appellant disputed the number of pri…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pleaded nolo contendere to sale of marijuana, was adjudicated guilty, and was sentenced to 30 months of imprisonment. The trial court determined that appellant had three prior felony convictions; consequently, the 30-month sentence was within the guidelines range.

At the sentencing hearing, appellant raised objection to the sentencing score-sheet, claiming he had only one prior felony conviction. Where the defendant disputes the truth of hearsay statements contained in pre-sentence investigation reports, which would be material to the statutory findings which the trial court is required to make, the court must require the state to produce corroborating evidence. Eutsey v. State, 383 So. 2d 219 (Fla.1980). We find this standard applies to sentencing guidelines cases.

The pre-sentence investigation report indicated appellant had four prior felony convictions. The trial court threw one out because it was a duplicate. Of the other three, two were verified by defendant’s probation officer in Nebraska. The third was not addressed, as evidenced by the State Attorney’s comment, “I wasn’t working on that one so I’m not positive on that. So, Your Honor, that would cut one felony off of the three.”

Because the third felony conviction was not corroborated in any way, the trial court’s determination that appellant had three prior felony convictions was, under Eutsey, supra, error, resulting in a longer sentence based on the higher guidelines range, and is therefore reversed.

The cause is remanded for a new sentencing hearing and such resentencing as may be required thereafter. BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., and TILLMAN PEARSON (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (27 total)

  • Vandeneynden v. State, 478 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
    …held that where a defendant disputes the truth of hearsay statements contained in a presentence investigatory report, the court must require the state to produce corroborating evidence. See Eutsey v. State, 383 So. 2d 219 (Fla.1980); Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Thus, upon remand the trial court is instructed to require the state to produce corroborating evidence or strike the disputed convictions from the score sheet. Lastly, the appellant contends that the scoring of victim injury as…
  • Scott v. State, 469 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
    …out Scott’s alleged threats ((2) and (5)) was obtained from victim statements, which appeared in the PSI requested by the court prior to sentencing. At the sentencing hearing, Scott disputed the truth of this hearsay. As we stated in Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985): Where a defendant disputes the truth of hearsay statements contained in presen-tence investigation reports, which would be material to the statutory findings which the trial court is required to make, the court must require the…
  • Dailey v. State, 471 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
    …Fla.1985), the trial court, in retaining jurisdiction over one-third of defendant’s sentence, failed to state with individual particularity its reasons for doing so, as required by Section 947.16(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1981). . In Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), the defendant, at the sentencing hearing, objected to the sentencing guidelines scoresheet, and the trial court ruled on the challenged underlying factual matters.…

Previewing 3 of 27 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw