CURTIS BERNARD FORD, 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 appellate court reversed a defendant's sentences and probation orders, finding the trial court erred by using multiple scoresheets and issuing general probation orders for multiple offenses. The court remanded for resentencing with a single scoresheet and separate probation orders.
Yes, the trial court erred by using multiple scoresheets and issuing general probation orders. A single scoresheet must be used for all pending offenses, and separate probation orders are required for each offense.
[1] A single guideline scoresheet must be utilized for each defendant covering all offenses pending before the court for sentencing.
[2] A trial judge has the burden to assure that all of a defendant's cases pending for sentencing in a particular county are disposed of using one scoresheet.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“one guideline scoresheet shall be utilized for each defendant covering all offenses pending before the court for sentencing.”
Establishes the rule requiring a single scoresheet for all pending offenses.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCurtis Ford pleaded guilty to multiple offenses but was sentenced in only six cases, with three different scoresheets used. He was also placed on prob…
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.
DANIEL, Judge.
Appellant Curtis Ford was charged by informations in numerous cases with burglary, theft, dealing in stolen property and criminal mischief. He pleaded guilty in ten cases but was only sentenced in six cases. Three separate scoresheets were used. On appeal, Ford argues that the trial court erred by failing to utilize the same scoresheet for all offenses pending for sentencing. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(1) provides that one guideline scoresheet shall be utilized for each defendant covering all offenses pending before the court for sentencing. In Gallagher v. State, 476 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), this court held that the trial judge has the burden to assure that all of the defendant’s cases pending for sentencing in a particular county are disposed of using one score-sheet. See also Hagins v. State, 509 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). We therefore reverse on this point and remand for resentencing utilizing one properly calculated scoresheet.
Ford also argues that the trial court improperly issued a general order of probation for separate offenses. In one judgment and order of probation, Ford was placed on probation for two burglaries and grand theft stemming from three separate cases. In another judgment and order of probation, Ford was placed on probation for two counts of theft and dealing in stolen property stemming from two separate cases. A general order of probation predicated on more than one conviction for criminal activity is improper. A separate order of probation for each offense must be entered. Cervantes v. State, 442 So. 2d 176 (Fla.1983); Delk v. State, 510 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Price v. State, 393 So. 2d 69 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). We therefore reverse on this point and remand for the entry of separate probation orders.
The convictions are affirmed and the sentences and orders of probation reversed and remanded for resentencing utilizing one properly calculated scoresheet and separate probation orders.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.
ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rice v. State, 546 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…tences was error1 under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(1) which mandates that one score-sheet be prepared for all offenses pending before the court for sentencing. Washington v. State, 539 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Ford v. State, 528 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Arnett v. State, 526 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). See also, Stokes v. State, 512 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Hagins v. State, 509 So. 2d 1244 (Fla.2d DCA 1987). In Gallagher v. State, 476 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985),…
-
Goss v. State, 569 So. 2d 1390 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…ts the sentencing court erred in using only one guideline scoresheet when sentencing appellant for two crimes. Appellant cites no authority for his position and failed to advise this court of cases directly against his position. See Ford v. State, 528 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Gallagher v. State, 476 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). He also failed to recognize and attempt to deal with a specific rule of criminal procedure governing the proper procedure. Rule 3.701(d)(1), Florida Rules of Criminal Proce…
Authorities Cited
- Gallagher v. State, 476 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Price v. State, 393 So. 2d 69 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Cervantes v. State, 442 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1983)
- Hagins v. State, 509 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Delk v. State, 510 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)