PAUL HAMILTON, 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 court held that the failure to prepare a guidelines scoresheet and the lack of contemporaneous written reasons for departure constitute reversible error.
Defendant was convicted of two counts of armed robbery and sentenced. The appellate court reviewed the sentences imposed.…
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 Guidelines Scoresheet cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Judge.
Hamilton has appealed from the sentences imposed upon him following convictions on two counts of armed robbery. We reverse and vacate the sentences.
Our review of the record fails to disclose a guidelines scoresheet. Although there is some indication in the record that the trial court may have had a scoresheet before it at the time of sentencing, indicating a presumptive range, we have held in similar circumstances that the failure to prepare a scoresheet and incorporate it in the record is error, albeit harmless. See Williams v. State, 529 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), Davis v. State, 461 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 471 So. 2d 43 (Fla.1985). The more serious deficiency we find, however, is the trial court’s failure to file contemporaneous written reasons supporting departure. The supreme court has deemed this omission reversible error in State v. Oden, 478 So. 2d 51 (Fla.1985).
Finally, the enunciated reasons for departure are invalid. The trial court enhanced Hamilton’s robbery sentence because it involved two victims. The fact of two victims, however, gave rise to convictions on two separate counts. Thus, each of the crimes was included in the score-sheet computation. See Hendrix v. State, 475 So. 2d 1218 (Fla.1985). The defect in the second departure reason—that Hamilton intended to use the robbery proceeds to foster illegal drug purchases—is so closely akin to a departure based upon a crime for which a conviction has not been obtained that it cannot survive our review. See State v. Tyner, 506 So. 2d 405 (Fla.1987).
Thus, on remand, the trial court is directed to sentence Hamilton within the guidelines, Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1987), and with the benefit of a scoresheet to be filed in the record.
Reversed and remanded for resentencing within the recommended guidelines range.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hayes v. State, 564 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…alid. The reasons given were the involvement of multiple victims, the defendant’s motive for the crimes being to enable him to commit other felonies (drug crimes), and his status as an ongoing danger to society. These are invalid. Hamilton v. State, 537 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (first two reasons offered in the instant case were found invalid in codefendant’s appeal). See Keys v. State, 500 So. 2d 134 (Fla.1986) (danger to community not valid departure reason). In summary, we reverse the defendant’s att…
-
Bennith Paul v. State, 735 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…es, the court’s failure to use a scoresheet did not constitute reversible error. See Stokes v. State, 476 So. 2d 313, 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The court’s failure to use a scoresheet in this case was [*573] harmless — at best. See Hamilton v. State, 537 So. 2d 194, 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Williams v. State, 529 So. 2d 366, 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We therefore affirm the order denying the appellant’s motion made pursuant to rule 3.800, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Affirmed.…
-
Erick Mott v. State, 549 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…. We vacate Mott’s sentence and remand to the trial court for resentencing within the guidelines. See Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla.1987). The reasons given by the trial court for departing from the guidelines are invalid, Hamilton v. State, 537 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Brunson v. State, 492 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), or are unsupported by the record. See State v. Jones, 530 So. 2d 53 (Fla.1988). The trial court stated three reasons for departure, two of which the state now concedes were i…
Authorities Cited
- Hendrix v. State, 475 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1985)
- Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1987)
- State v. Tyner, 506 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 1987)
- Davis v. State, 461 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- THE Florida BAR v. Winter, 478 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 1985)
- Madelyn D. Williams v. State, 529 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)