JOHN KOSTAKI PFEIFFER, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed a sentence imposed based on a newly calculated scoresheet that included previously unscored juvenile convictions, holding that factual errors in sentencing guidelines cannot be corrected through Rule 3.800(a) motions.
A trial court cannot use Rule 3.800(a) to correct a factual error in a sentencing guidelines scoresheet, only errors of law apparent on the face of the record.
[1] A factual error in a sentencing guidelines scoresheet, such as the omission of prior convictions, cannot be corrected under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), w…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePfeiffer was sentenced to nine years for violating community control. At the revocation proceeding, the state presented a newly calculated scoresheet …
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 Sentencing Error cases and more on FLexlaw
ERVIN, Judge.
Appellant, John Kostaki Pfeiffer, was sentenced to a term of nine years of incarceration following violation of his earlier imposed sentence of community control. At the revocation proceeding, the state presented a newly calculated score-sheet, which included two prior juvenile convictions that had not been scored on appellant’s original scoresheet, and which resulted in a greater sentence than that originally recommended. Over objection, the trial court sentenced appellant in accordance with the newly calculated score-sheet. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) authorizes a trial court, at any time, to correct “an incorrect calculation made by it in a sentencing guidelines score-sheet.” See also State v. Whitfield, 487 So. 2d 1045 (Fla.1986); State v. Chaplin, 490 So. 2d 52 (Fla.1986). A distinction exists, however, between an error of law, which is apparent on the face of the record, and an error of fact, which is not apparent on the face of the record. If the error is one of fact, as is the case here, it cannot be corrected on appeal or by 3.800(a) motion. See Dailey v. State, 488 So. 2d 532 (Fla.1986); Lomont v. State, 506 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Senior v. State, 502 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 511 So. 2d 299 (Fla.1987).
We therefore REVERSE and REMAND with directions that the trial judge impose a sentence within the range recommended in the original scoresheet. See Graham v. State, 559 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Roberts v. State, 644 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 1994)…scoresheet unless the omission was the result of an affirmative act by the defendant. Manuel v. State, 582 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Harris v. State, 574 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 2d DCA), cause dismissed, 581 So. 2d 1310 (Fla.1991); Pfeiffer v. State, 568 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Graham v. State, 559 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). However, the Fifth District Court of Appeal recently relied on Roberts to hold that prior convictions omitted from the original score-sheet can be considered upon violation of…1 / 2
-
Manuel v. State, 582 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…trial court sentenced the appellant under the revised scoresheet to five years’ incarceration. This was error. A trial court must use the original scoresheet at sentencing following revocation of probation or community control, Pfeiffer v. State, 568 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), even though the state discovers additional prior convictions which the defendant committed under aliases. Harris v. State, 574 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). A contrary result has been reached where the defendant affirmatively…
-
Harris v. State, 574 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…pursuant to the original scoresheet with a one-cell bump for the violation of probation. We reverse the sentences because a trial court must use the original scoresheet when sentencing a defendant on a violation of probation. See Pfeiffer v. State, 568 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Graham v. State, 559 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). The state acknowledges the Graham decision but asks this court to decline to follow it. The Pfeiffer and Graham opinions do not disclose the reasons that the prior conviction…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Whitfield, 487 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 1986)
- THE Florida BAR v. Rightmyer, 488 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 1986)
- Lomont v. State, 506 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- State v. Chaplin, 490 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 1986)
- Graham v. State, 559 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Crews v. State, 502 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Senior v. State, 502 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)