JAMES EDWARD DAWSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sentencing Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
[*90] GUNTHER, Judge.
Defendant appeals his resentencing conducted on remand pursuant to this court’s opinion in Dawson v. State, 491 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). At resentencing, an incorrectly calculated scoresheet led the trial judge to mistakenly believe that the defendant’s guideline sentence range was life in prison. However, the correct guideline sentence range was actually 27-40 years in prison. Although the trial judge used an improperly prepared scoresheet, he sentenced the defendant to 35 years in prison which is still within the recommended guideline sentence.
The trial court must have the benefit of a properly prepared scoresheet before it can make a fully informed decision on whether to depart from the recommended guideline sentence. Davis v. State, 493 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Since the trial judge might have imposed a different sentence had he had the benefit of a corrected score-sheet, defendant’s sentence must be vacated. On remand, the trial judge may resen-tence defendant to 35 years in prison since such a sentence is within the recommended guideline range. Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing under a corrected guideline scoresheet.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
HERSEY, C.J., and STONE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Erickson v. State, 565 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…y of assuring that scoresheets are accurately prepared. Fla.R.Crim. P. 3.701(d)(1), Committee Notes. In order to reach a fully informed sentencing decision, the trial court must have the benefit of an accurately prepared scoresheet. Dawson v. State, 532 So. 2d 89, 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). See Ratushinak v. State, 517 So. 2d 749, 753 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), rev. denied, 525 So. 2d 880 (1988); Hembree v. State, 519 So. 2d 1138, 1139 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). This requirement applies even if the trial court expresses an…
-
Zeigler v. State, 647 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…of years in prison which is within the recommended guideline range. However, because the trial judge may have imposed a different sentence had he the benefit of a properly calculated scoresheet, defendant’s sentence must be vacated. Dawson v. State, 532 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); see also Davis v. State, 493 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). On remand, the trial judge may resentence defendant, under the original terms, to two concurrent terms of 20 years in prison, followed by five years probation, as such…
-
Aleño Santana Madrigal v. State, 683 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…is entitled to be resentenced upon a properly calculated guidelines scoresheet. See Cochran v. State, 592 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Erickson v. State, 565 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), rev. denied, 576 So. 2d 286 (Fla.1991); Dawson v. State, 532 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). Erroneously using the 1.5 multiplier placed appellant in a sentencing range of 52.8 months to 88.0 months state imprisonment, with a recommended sentence of 70.4 months [*1095] imprisonment. Without the 1.5 multiplier, appellan…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Davis v. State, 493 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Dawson v. State, 491 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)