REGINALD HARRIS, 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.
Appellant's conviction affirmed where record shows he affirmatively elected guidelines sentencing at his original sentencing hearing, making his later objection to guidelines sentencing without merit.
An affirmative election to be sentenced under the guidelines made at the original sentencing hearing is binding and precludes a later challenge to guidelines sentencing at a subsequent sentencing hearing.
[1] An affirmative election to be sentenced under the guidelines made at an original sentencing hearing binds the defendant and precludes challenge to guidelines sentencing a…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarris was charged with grand theft in the second degree in September 1983, pled no contest on October 31, 1984, and was placed on probation. On March…
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 Affirmative Election For Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Judge.
The appellant was charged with a grand theft in the second degree which occurred in September of 1983. He pled no contest to the charge on October 31,1984, and was placed on probation. On March 25, 1987, the appellant was found to have violated the terms of his probation, was adjudicated guilty of the grand theft, and was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment under the guidelines. The appellant contends that he did not affirmatively elect to be sentenced under the guidelines at the sentencing hearing of March 25, 1987. He admits that his counsel and the court discussed the appropriate guidelines sentence but alleges that mere discussion does not constitute an affirmative election.
In the instant case the record affirmatively reflects that the appellant did elect to be sentenced under the guidelines at his original sentencing hearing on October 81. The record does not contain a transcript of that hearing reflecting otherwise, and it does contain a scoresheet that was prepared and utilized in sentencing the appellant. Since the appellant elected guidelines sentencing at his original sentencing hearing, his argument that he was not given the opportunity to do so at the subsequent sentencing hearing is without merit.
Affirmed.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ramirez v. State, 540 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…he guidelines. If Ramirez did elect to be sentenced under the guidelines at her original sentencing hearing, the transcript of which is not a part of this record, then that election would carry over to the subsequent sentencing. See Harris v. State, 522 So. 2d 527, 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We, therefore, must remand this case for the trial judge’s determination of whether Ramirez previously elected to be sentenced under the guidelines for the 1983 offense. See Boyd v. State, 538 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).…