BILLY G. BAKER, 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.
The court held that the trial court erred in not requiring further corroboration for disputed prior convictions and in departing from the recommended guidelines sentence.
[1] A trial court must require further corroborating evidence of disputed prior convictions to ensure a proper sentencing scoresheet.
[2] Prior convictions that are factored into a sentencing scoresheet cannot serve as a valid reason for departing from the recommended guidelines sentence.
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 intelligenceAppellant was sentenced for burglary and auto theft, with the state attorney relying on an FBI rap sheet and a conversation with an Ohio prosecutor fo…
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 Corroboration Of Prior Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
BARFIELD, Judge.
Billy G. Baker appeals his sentences for burglary and auto theft. The defendant contends the trial court erred in not requiring further corroboration as to his disputed prior record and in departing from the recommended guidelines sentence. We agree with appellant and reverse for both bases.
The state attorney prepared the score-sheet in reliance on an FBI rap sheet and a telephone conversation with an Ohio prosecutor as substantiation for the scoring of two second degree felonies and two third degree felonies. Baker objected on hearsay grounds and further contended that two of the Ohio convictions were equivalent to misdemeanors in Florida. The court refused to amend the scoresheet or to require the State to produce further corroborating evidence of the prior convictions. The scoresheet total of 96 points thus recommended a sentence of 3Vz to 4½ years in state prison.
The defendant’s objection was not just to the hearsay nature of the evidence but specifically disputed the correctness of the evidence. The court should have required the State to provide further corroborating evidence of the past convictions to insure a proper sentencing scoresheet. Brooks v. State, 466 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
Of the four reasons for departure, the defendant has challenged all but the first reason. The presence of four prior convictions for a similar crime, indicating little hope of rehabilitation, is not a valid reason as the convictions are factored into the scoresheet. Hendrix v. State, 475 So. 2d 1218 (Fla.1985). The fact that a guideline sentence would not deter Baker’s criminal activity is not a valid reason for departure. That is only a comment on the trial judge’s opinion as to the sufficiency of the guidelines sentence. The final reason, lack of remorse, is an invalid reason. Scurry v. State, 472 So. 2d 779 (Fla.1985).
The sentences are REVERSED and the case REMANDED to the trial court for resentencing.
SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
McKAY v. State, 504 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…dispute the truth of the listed convictions, the state is not required to come forward with corroboration thereof. Wright v. State, 476 So. 2d 325, 327 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). See also Stacey v. State, 483 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Baker v. State, 493 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Olivera v. State, 494 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Affirmed. SHIVERS and JOANOS, JJ„ concur.…
-
Bass v. State, 496 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…th our reasons for finding the four remaining reasons invalid. First, the mere similarity of the crimes to appellant’s prior record is not a valid reason for departure. See Hendrix v. State, 475 So. 2d 1218 (Fla.1985); Baker v. State, (Fla. 1st DCA 493 So. 2d 515, 1986); see also, Riggins v. State, 489 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Dorado v. State, 482 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Parsons v. State, 491 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Second, the court found significant the number of crimes appellant had…
-
Johnson v. State, 583 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…t disputed one of his convictions for grand larceny which was scored as part of his prior record, we must reverse and remand for resentencing. Vance v. State, 545 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 551 So. 2d 463 (Fla.1989); and Baker v. State, 493 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). On remand, the state will be permitted to furnish corroborating evidence of the prior conviction challenged. If the challenged grand larceny conviction is not verified, appellant shall be resentenced accordingly. Spann v. State,…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hendrix v. State, 475 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1985)
- Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Scurry v. State, 472 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Brooks v. State, 466 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)