ROBERT SHANE RIGGS, 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.
Robert Shane Riggs appealed his sentencing under Florida's criminal sentencing guidelines, challenging how multiple burglary offenses were scored. The court found that burglaries of a conveyance or structure (third-degree felonies) were improperly scored as primary offenses rather than additional offenses when burglaries of a dwelling (second-degree felonies) were the most severe offenses, requiring resentencing.
Burglaries of a conveyance or structure should not have been scored as primary offenses because they are different in degree from the burglaries of a dwelling. Under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(4), only offenses of the same distinct offense and degree may be scored as multiple primary offenses; all other different offenses must be scored as additional offenses.
[1] Burglaries of a conveyance or structure should not be scored under the primary offense category when other offenses, such as burglaries of a dwelling, are also pending fo…
[2] When multiple counts of the same distinct offense and degree of felony are scored as primary offenses, other offenses for which the defendant is convicted and pending for…
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“While multiple counts of the primary offense are thus scored as multiple primary offenses, crimes which are different, even as to degree, are scored as additional offenses.”
Establishes the key distinction between scoring multiple counts of the same offense versus different offenses
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRiggs was convicted of seven burglary offenses: four burglaries of a dwelling (second-degree felonies) and three burglaries of a conveyance or structu…
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.
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of sentences imposed pursuant to the Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701 sentencing guidelines. These sentences were for various offenses, including four burglaries of a dwelling and three burglaries of a conveyance or structure. We find that the burglaries of a conveyance or structure should not have been scored under the primary offense category on the guidelines scoresheet. We therefore vacate the sentences imposed and remand the cause for resentencing.
Appellant’s burglaries of a dwelling were scored as primary offenses, in accordance with Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(3) which provides that in the event of multiple offenses the primary offense shall be that which yields the most severe sanction. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(4) specifies that other offenses pending for sentencing should be scored as additional offenses. The committee note to Rule 3.701(d)(4), as amended in 1985, provides that:
In the event of multiple counts of the same distinct offense and degree of felony being scored as primary offense, it shall be scored as additional counts of the primary offense. All other offenses for which the defendant is convicted and are pending before the court for sentencing shall be scored as additional offenses.
While multiple counts of the primary offense are thus scored as multiple primary offenses, crimes which are different, even as to degree, are scored as additional offenses. Compare Doner v. State, 515 So. 2d 1368 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), with Carroll v. State, 530 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).
Appellant’s primary offenses, burglaries of a dwelling, are second degree felonies. See section 810.02(3), Florida Statutes. The other burglaries, which were committed in a structure or conveyance, are third degree felonies. See section 810.02(3), Florida Statutes. Since these were not “the same distinct offense and degree” as the burglaries of a dwelling, they should have been scored as additional offenses rather than primary offenses.
Because the improper scoring resulted in an altered computation which produced a different recommended guidelines sentence, we vacate the sentences imposed and remand the cause for resentencing.
THOMPSON and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gibbs v. State, 667 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…alty, which must be scored as the “primary offense at conviction,” should be scored together as multiple counts of the same offense, regardless of when the offenses were committed. Jeter v. State, 604 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Riggs v. State, 540 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings. ERVIN, BOOTH and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.…
-
Schroeder v. State, 680 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…and the state agree that, pursuant to the rule and Gibbs and Jeter, the three second-degree felonies should have been scored together as multiple counts of the primary offense. Gibbs, 667 So. 2d at 371-72; Jeter, 604 So. 2d at 1250; Riggs v. State, 540 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Although the sentences imposed by the trial court are incorrect due to a score-sheet error, the state correctly notes that these concurrent eight-year sentences imposed for Counts I through III are not “illegal sentences” as de…
Authorities Cited
- Verne Albert Doner v. State, 515 So. 2d 1368 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Carroll v. State, 530 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)