TRAVIS LEE STUART, 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.
Travis Lee Stuart appealed his conviction for first-degree murder and his sentence for grand theft in the second degree. The court affirmed his convictions but reversed his grand theft sentence because the trial judge incorrectly used a category one scoresheet instead of a category six scoresheet when computing the guidelines sentence, since capital felonies cannot be scored under Florida's sentencing guidelines.
The court held that capital felonies cannot be scored under the sentencing guidelines and therefore cannot be the primary offense for determining which scoresheet to use. A category six scoresheet should have been used for the grand theft conviction. The first-degree murder conviction may be considered as a reason to depart from the guidelines, but it cannot determine the appropriate scoresheet category.
[1] Capital felonies are not subject to sentencing guidelines and cannot be used to calculate the presumptive sentencing range.
[2] A prior conviction for a capital felony may serve as a clear and convincing reason for departing from sentencing guidelines for a non-capital felony.
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“Capital felonies are not subject to the sentencing guidelines, § 921.001(4)(a), Fla.Stat. (1985), and cannot be considered in calculating the presumptive range.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that capital felonies like first-degree murder are excluded from the sentencing guidelines framework
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceStuart was convicted of first-degree murder (a capital felony) and grand theft in the second degree. At sentencing, the state advised the trial judge …
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 Departure From Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Judge.
The appellant challenges his conviction for first degree murder and his sentence for grand theft in the second degree. He raises several points on appeal, but we only find merit in his contention that the trial judge erred in using a category one score-sheet when computing his guidelines sentence for the grand theft conviction.
At the sentencing hearing the state advised the trial judge that there were no category six scoresheets in the courtroom. The trial judge stated that a category one scoresheet should be used reflecting the higher offense of first degree murder. The state seems to concede that it was error to utilize a category one scoresheet in sentencing the appellant for the grand theft as Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(3) defines primary offense as that offense at conviction which, when scored on the guidelines scoresheet, recommends the most severe sanction. However, a first degree murder conviction, a capital felony, cannot be scored as an offense at conviction since the guidelines apply only to all noncapital felonies. But, the state further contends that first degree murder constitutes a clear and convincing reason to depart, as it would be an unscored conviction using a category six scoresheet.
We agree with the state and reverse the grand theft sentence but affirm the conviction for grand theft and the conviction and sentence for first degree murder. Capital felonies are not subject to the sentencing guidelines, § 921.001(4)(a), Fla.Stat. (1985), and cannot be considered in calculating the presumptive range. Smith v. State, 454 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Consequently, a category six (thefts) scoresheet should have been used to compute the appellant’s guidelines sentence for the grand theft conviction. The appellant’s first degree murder conviction may be considered by the trial judge as a reason for departing from the guidelines. Id.
Accordingly, we affirm the appellant’s convictions but reverse the appellant’s sentence for grand theft and remand for re-sentencing with directions consistent with this opinion.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.