JOHN CALVIN ASH, 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.
Ash appealed his sentences for theft and burglary, both third-degree felonies with a statutory maximum of five years each. The trial court imposed two concurrent 10-year sentences based on a guideline scoresheet recommending 12-17 years, which exceeded the statutory maximum. The appellate court quashed the sentences and remanded for resentencing, holding that when guidelines exceed the statutory maximum, the statutory maximum must be imposed.
When a guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum, the statutory maximum must be imposed. For the crimes at issue, five-year sentences were required. The court may exercise discretion to impose sentences consecutively or concurrently. Simultaneous sentencing on a single scoresheet is required only for offenses pending in the same county, not merely the same circuit.
[1] When a recommended guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum for a felony, the statutory maximum sentence must be imposed.
[2] Sentencing for offenses pending before the court is restricted to convictions pending for sentencing in the same county, even if the offenses are within the same judicial…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“if the recommended guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum "the statutory maximum should be imposed."”
Establishes the controlling legal rule that statutory maximums must be imposed when guidelines recommendations exceed them.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAsh was convicted of theft of a truck and burglary, both third-degree felonies. The trial court sentenced him to two concurrent 10-year prison terms. …
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 Sentencing Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
SHARP, Judge.
Ash appeals from his sentences imposed for theft of a truck1 and burglary.2 The State concedes that both of these crimes are third degree felonies3 for which the statutory maximum sentence is five years each, respectively.4 The trial court sentenced Ash to two concurrent 10 year prison terms. Based on the scoresheet at sentencing (190 points), Ash’s presumptive sentence under the guidelines was 12 to 17 years. We quash the sentences and remand for resentencing.
Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701 d.10. provides that' if the recommended guidelines sentence exceeds the statutory maximum “the statutory maximum should be imposed.” See State v. Thomas, 528 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); State v. Martin, 502 So. 2d 1371 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Thus, the court must impose 5 year sentences for the two crimes for which Ash was convicted. But, in its discretion, it may choose to have them run consecutively.5
We reject Ash’s additional argument that he should have been sentenced for these two crimes simultaneously with, and on the basis of, the same scoresheet as two unrelated crimes committed in Marion County. The instant crimes were committed in Citrus County, within the same circuit as Marion County. We have not required simultaneous sentencing for all offenses pending before the same circuit. Rather, we restrict the application of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701 d.l.6 to convictions pending for sentencing in the same county. See Rice v. State, 546 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Allen v. State, 543 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Gallagher v. State, 476 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).
Accordingly we quash the sentence imposed and remand for resentencing. Also, we reverse the imposition of costs because they were improperly assessed without notice and hearing. See Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1988).
QUASH . SENTENCE AND COST AWARD; REMAND.
DANIEL, C.J., and COBB, J., concur. . § 812.014(2)(c)4., Fla.Stat. (1987).
. § 810.02, Fla.Stat. (1987).
.On remand, this judgment should be corrected to show reference to the proper criminal statute, i.e., section 812.012(2)(c)4., rather than section 812.014(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1987).
. § 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1987).
. § 921.16, Fla.Stat.1987.
. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701 d.l. provides:
One guideline scoresheet shall be utilized for each defendant covering all offenses pending before the court for sentencing. The state attorney’s office will prepare the scoresheets and present them to defense counsel for review as to accuracy in all cases unless the judge directs otherwise. The sentencing judge shall approve all scoresheets.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vroombout v. The Sch. Bd. of Orange Cnty. Fla. (9th Cir. Ct. App. Div. 2015)…at least thirty-eight chapters, each with numerous sections and subsections. It is not the role of the Court to develop the parties’ arguments for them 5 The Fifth District Court of Appeal cites the Thomas case with a “see” signal in Ash v. State, 554 So. 2d 553, 554 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). In Ash, the Fifth District held that the trial court must impose the statutory maximum of prison time, rather than a longer amount as dictated by the prisoner’s scoresheet, under the same rule of criminal procedure using…
-
Vroombout_v._Orange_Cty. (9th Cir. Ct. App. Div. 2015)
Authorities Cited
- Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)
- Gallagher v. State, 476 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- State v. Thomas, 528 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- State v. Martin, 502 So. 2d 1371 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Rice v. State, 546 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Finocchiaro v. State, 543 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)