MICHAEL NEWSOME, 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 affirmed the judgment for burglary and grand theft but reversed the sentences due to improper scoring of offenses.
Michael Newsome was convicted of burglary and grand theft. The state conceded that the trial judge incorrectly scored points for an additional offense…
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 Plain Error Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Michael Newsome appeals his judgment and sentences for the offenses of burglary and grand theft. We affirm the judgment but reverse the sentences.
We find no merit in Newsome’s argument that he was entitled to a judgment of acquittal on the burglary and grand theft counts. The state, however, concedes that the trial judge incorrectly scored seven points for an additional offense at conviction instead of three points. This court may review the error even though there was no contemporaneous objection, because the error is apparent and determinable from the record on appeal. See Bradley v. State, 480 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), cause dismissed, 486 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1986).
Because the improper scoring of New-some’s offenses resulted in a guidelines score that placed Newsome in a higher sentencing range, we reverse the sentences. Accordingly, we remand this case to the trial court to resentence Newsome utilizing a corrected scoresheet and without prejudice to the trial judge’s ability to impose a departure sentence based upon proper written reasons. See Jackson v. State, 534 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED WITH DIRECTIONS.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Northern Coats and Sadie Bell Coats, 559 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…g statements and may not now complain of the timing of the dismissal. See Dober v. Worrell, 401 So. 2d 1322 (Fla.1981); Tieso v. Metropolitan Dade County, 426 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 440 So. 2d 353 (Fla.1983); Benka v. Outerbridge, 539 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Abrams v. Paul, 453 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Affirmed. . We decline to adopt the statement of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Orange County v. Piper, 523 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 531 So. 2d 1354 (F…
Authorities Cited
- Bradley v. State, 480 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Jackson v. State, 534 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)