RAYMOND WALTER LANIER, 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.
Defendant appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to object to guideline scoresheet errors that inflated his sentencing range. The court reverses and remands, finding that the defendant presented a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief regarding ineffective assistance claims based on scoresheet inaccuracies.
The court holds that the defendant presented a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief for ineffective assistance of counsel. The court concludes that if there were prejudicial scoresheet errors and defense counsel knew of their possible existence but took no steps to ascertain or correct them, ineffective assistance of counsel occurred.
[1] A defendant may be entitled to post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to object to sentencing guideline score-sheet errors.
[2] Inaccurate scoring of offenses on a presentence investigation report can form the basis of a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“If there were prejudicial errors on the scoresheet and defense counsel knew of their possible existence and took no steps to ascertain whether there were errors and, if so, to correct or object to them, we cannot say that ineffective assistance of counsel did not occur.”
Establishes the court's test for ineffective assistance based on scoresheet errors—counsel's knowledge of possible errors combined with failure to investigate or correct them constitutes ineffective assistance.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRaymond Lanier received a fifteen-year sentence in 1983 for unarmed robbery, the maximum permissible by law. His conviction was affirmed without opini…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prima Facie Showing cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1185] LEHAN, Judge.
Defendant, Raymond Lanier, appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. We reverse.
In 1983 defendant received a fifteen-year sentence for unarmed robbery, the maximum permissible by law. His conviction was affirmed without opinion. Lanier v. State, 456 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Primarily due to his extensive past record as indicated by the presentence investigation report the sentence was shown to be within the range provided by the sentencing guidelines.
In his motion defendant claimed that his trial counsel was ineffective because of the failure to object to certain guideline score-sheet errors affecting the length of defendant’s presumptive sentence. To cite one example, defendant alleged that certain offenses scored as felonies, as indicated on the PSI, actually had been reduced to misdemeanors. He stated that he had apprised trial counsel of these inaccuracies. We conclude that the motion presents at least a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief.
In the absence of a contemporaneous objection, scoresheet inaccuracies not determinable on the basis of the record on appeal are not preserved for direct appellate review. Dailey v. State, 471 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Nor may the issue of a scoresheet inaccuracy be raised in a motion for post-conviction relief. Wahl v. State, 460 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
The state may in a proper ease be required to produce competent evidence to corroborate hearsay in a PSI report upon challenge by the defendant. See Rodriguez v. State, 472 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). If there were prejudicial errors on the scoresheet and defense counsel knew of their possible existence and took no steps to ascertain whether there were errors and, if so, to correct or object to them, we cannot say that ineffective assistance of counsel did not occur. We remand to the trial court with directions to either afford defendant a hearing on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel or to attach portions of the record sufficient to refute defendant’s claim. If the court again denies the motion, defendant must file a notice of appeal within thirty days to obtain further appellate review.
Reversed.
OTT, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lomont v. State, 506 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…. State, 486 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Alternatively, had Lomont advised counsel of the error, and had counsel failed to make an objection, the result might have been ineffective assistance and thus cognizable in a 3.850 motion. Lanier v. State, 478 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). However, Lomont does not state whether counsel was apprised of the alleged scoresheet inaccuracy. For these reasons, the order of the trial court is affirmed. See Hair v. State, 503 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) and Rowe v. Stat…
-
Dilar S. Booker v. State, 482 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…regarding the accuracy of the scoresheet. Defendant has never pointed to any specific errors in the score-sheet, nor does he argue on this appeal that the scoresheet is, in fact, incorrect. Therefore, error, if any, is harmless. Cf. Lanier v. State, 478 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Further, we reject the defendant’s fourth contention that the trial court erred by departing from the guidelines recommended sentence without clear and convincing reasons. The trial judge entered a written “Order of Aggravating…
-
Manuel v. State, 629 So. 2d 1052 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…guideline recommendation was largely the product of uneounseled juvenile adjudications scored as “prior record.” See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(5)(G). Counsel, however, allegedly failed to challenge any of these convictions. We held in Lanier v. State, 478 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), that the failure to object to known guideline scoresheet errors could constitute ineffective assistance. In Pettway v. State, 502 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), we specifically dealt with an alleged failure to object to uncounse…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dailey v. State, 471 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Wahl v. State, 460 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Rodriguez v. State, 472 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)