HAZEL THOMAS, 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 trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion to correct sentence due to the use of an erroneous scoresheet.
Appellant pled no contest to sexual battery based on a plea agreement and a scoresheet that incorrectly reflected the presumptive guidelines range. Th…
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 Correction Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
Appellant, Hazel Thomas, was charged with sexual battery upon a child in violation of section 794.011(2), Florida Statutes (1987). Appellant pled no contest pursuant to a plea agreement with the state in which it was agreed the state would recommend a sentence of seven years’ imprisonment, followed by three years’ probation. At the plea hearing the court asked counsel whether the sentence was within the presumptive guidelines range and was advised by both counsel that it was. Appellant was sentenced accordingly.
Thereafter, appellant learned that the scoresheet used by counsel and the court was in error because the “primary offense at conviction” was incorrectly scored reflecting a range of 7 to 9 years, whereas the scoresheet should properly have reflected a range of 3½ to 4¾⅞ years. The trial court denied appellant’s motion for correction of sentence.
We hold the trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion to correct the sentence due to use of an erroneous score-sheet. Such an error can be raised for the first time as late as a motion for post-conviction relief. State v. Chaplin, 490 So. 2d 52 (Fla.1986); Parker v. State, 506 So. 2d 86 (Fla.2d DCA 1987).
Accordingly, the sentence appealed from is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to resentence appellant using a proper guidelines score- sheet, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d).
WALDEN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Banner v. State, 660 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…ng for the victim injury on re-sentencing for consideration by the court before resentencing. Scott v. State, 638 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Boland v. State, 613 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 624 So. 2d 268 (Fla.1993); Thomas v. State, 547 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). STONE, PARIENTE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Chaplin, 490 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 1986)
- Parker v. State, 506 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)