MICHAEL ANTHONY ROTZ, 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.
Michael Anthony Rotz appealed his burglary sentence, challenging the scoring of a prior Indiana conviction in the sentencing guidelines. The court affirmed the judgment but vacated and remanded the sentence, requiring clarification of the underlying Indiana statute to ensure proper analogy to Florida law or rescoring in the defendant's favor.
The sentence was improper and remanded for resentencing. Either the appropriate Indiana statute must be substantiated and properly analogized to Florida law, or the prior conviction must be rescored as a third-degree felony rather than a second-degree felony to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt. The court clarified that the nature of the prior crime, not the penalty, determines the appropriate analogy to Florida law.
[1] A prior out-of-state conviction must be scored under the Florida statute analogous to that conviction, considering the nature of the prior crime, not its penalty.
[2] When the specific out-of-state statute for a prior conviction is unclear, a court must either substantiate the appropriate statute for analogy or give the defendant the b…
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“Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(5)(a)(2) requires assignment of the score for the Florida statute analogous to that out-of-state conviction.”
Establishes the legal requirement that prior out-of-state convictions must be scored according to the analogous Florida statute.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRotz was convicted of burglary of a structure and sentenced based on sentencing guidelines that included a prior Indiana conviction. However, the reco…
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 Sentencing Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
DANIEL, Judge.
Michael Anthony Rotz appeals a judgment and sentence for burglary of a structure. Rotz contends that the sentence is illegal because it was partially based on an improperly scored prior Indiana conviction. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(5)(a)(2) requires assignment of the score for the Florida statute analogous to that out-of-state conviction. However, it is not clear from the record under which Indiana statute the defendant was convicted. Thus, we must remand for resentencing for either substantiation of the appropriate Indiana statute1 to be analogized to Florida law or rescoring as a third rather than second degree felony to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt. See Armontrout v. State, 503 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Robbins v. State, 482 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); and Vandeneynden v. State, 478 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).
Assuming that the appropriate Indiana robbery statute is the same as that reproduced in Brown v. State of Indiana, 178 Ind.App. 38, 381 N.E. 2d 500 (1978), the defendant’s argument that the statute cannot be analogized to Florida’s has no merit. Sentencing guidelines intended to treat “conduct as it would be treated in Florida ...” See Frazier v. State, 515 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Thus, it is the nature of the prior crime that is to be considered when attempting to find an analogous Florida statute. See Samples v. State, 516 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1987). The penalty is not the determining factor. Unless the offense defined in the appropriate Indiana statute is significantly different from that in Brown, Rotz’ prior conviction should be scored as a second degree felony as there is no third degree felony in Florida for an analogous robbery offense. See § 812.13, Fla. Statutes (1985).
The judgment is affirmed, the sentence vacated and this cause remanded for resentencing consistent with this opinion.
Judgment AFFIRMED; sentence VACATED; and REMANDED.
DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur. . Scoring of a prior conviction is to be made as that crime was classified at the time it was committed. See Frazier v. State, 515 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Johnson v. State, 476 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Erickson v. State, 565 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…imposed, control in the determination of whether there is a Florida statute analogous to the statute proscribing the out-of-state crime. Forehand v. State, 537 So. 2d 103 (Fla.1989), aff'g 524 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). See also Rotz v. State, 521 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Included in the defendant’s prior record is a California conviction for child molesting, which shows a disposition of “one to life.” Apparently on the basis of such disposition, the California conviction was scored as a first de…
-
Forehand v. State, 524 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…should then determine whether Florida has a criminal statute for an analogous or parallel crime. If such a crime exists in Florida, the out-of-state conviction should be scored as a conviction under the analogous Florida statute. See Rotz v. State, 521 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Samples v. State, 516 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Frazier v. State, 515 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Armontrout v. State, 503 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Noland v. State, 489 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Robbins v.…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Vandeneynden v. State, 478 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Johnson v. State, 476 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Robbins v. State, 482 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Frazier v. State, 515 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Armontrout v. State, 503 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Samples v. State, 516 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)