DONALD CHAFFIN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The trial court used three prior uncoun-seled misdemeanor convictions in calculating the sentencing guidelines scoresheet, causing appellant’s score to be aggravated one cell. This was impermissible. Pilla v. State, 477 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), and Hayes v. State, 468 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). We reverse and remand for resentencing.
We further reverse the imposition of costs and remand for reconsideration and a proper determination. Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984), and Lawson v. State, 470 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).
Reversed and Remanded.
DOWNEY and WALDEN, JJ., and WES-SEL, JOHN D., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cameshia Byrd v. BT Foods, Inc., 948 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…ht most favorable to the non-moving party.” City of Lauderhill v. Rhames, 864 So. 2d 432, 434 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Where credibility issues impact the determination of material facts, summary judgment is not appropriate. See Kuczkir v. Martell, 480 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Both parties have cited federal district and circuit court cases. To the extent that the federal cases permit summary judgment based on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 as interpreted in Celotex [*924] Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U…
-
Hernandez v. United Auto. Ins. Co., Inc., 730 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…ry judgment proceeding.”); Shapiro v. Barron, 538 So. 2d 1319, 1320 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (reasoning that “[j]udging the credibility of witnesses or weighing the evidence are not proper subjects of a motion for summary judgment.”); Kuczkir v. Martell, 480 So. 2d 700, 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (stating that “[wjhere the [*346] issue of credibility is present, summary judgment is inappropriate.”); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gant, 460 So. 2d 912, 913 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (holding that “[i]t goes without saying…
-
Whitby v. Infinity Radio Inc., 951 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…nity’s legitimate business interests and the broadness of the non-compete covenant is by way of testimony that necessarily gives rise to questions of credibility, determinations of which are inappropriate on summary judgment. See Kuczkir v. Martell, 480 So. 2d 700, 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Therefore, the trial court erred in granting Infinity’s motion for partial summary judgment and concluding that the non-compete covenant was enforceable, without conducting an evidentiary hearing to hear testimony and rece…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Pilla v. State, 477 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Older v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 468 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Hayes v. State, 468 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Otha Sizemore v. State, 470 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Lawson v. State, 470 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)