WILLIAM HEMPHILL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 held that a defendant's claims of misunderstanding or ineffective assistance of counsel were not prejudicial when he agreed to the ultimate sentencing consequences of the plea agreement.
The defendant appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 motion, which sought to withdraw his plea. His primary grounds were that he was misadvised by coun…
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 Guidelines Scoresheet cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from a denial of a Rule 3.850 motion which was disposed of without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.
The defendant’s primary ground for relief lies in the claim that he was misad- vised by his counsel or otherwise did not understand precisely to which of the several charges against him he would plead and which would be abandoned by the state. However, the motion notably fails to allege that he did not agree to the ultimate sentencing consequences of the plea agreement: fifteen years in prison, followed by five years probation. In this posture, we must conclude that neither any “misunderstanding” nor ineffective assistance of counsel was prejudicial to the defendant in any meaningful sense. Shaffner v. State, 562 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); see Williams v. State, 553 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Thus, this prong of the motion was properly denied.
Hemphill’s second argument is that the guidelines scoresheet was improperly calculated by considering the offense of attempted first degree murder with a firearm as a life felony. While we agree that an improper guidelines calculation may be the subject of a 3.850 proceeding, State v. Chaplin, 490 So. 2d 52 (Fla.1986), the point raised here is substantively incorrect. § 775.087(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989); State v. Flemmings, 579 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 3d 1991); Williams v. State, 360 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).1
Affirmed.
. We need not decide whether even an incorrect guidelines determination makes any difference when, as here, there is a plea agreement to a specific sentence which would have justified an upward departure. See Smith v. State, 529 So. 2d 1106 (Fla.1988); Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1988).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McGEE v. State, 791 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…PER CURIAM. The judgment and scoresheet correctly classify the offense of attempted first degree murder with a firearm as a life felony. Wilson v. State, 666 So. 2d 271 (Fla. [*1253] 3d DCA 1996); Hemphill v. State, 579 So. 2d 841 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Mullins, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla. 1988)
- State v. Chaplin, 490 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 1986)
- Benny Ray Smith v. State, 529 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 1988)
- Williams v. State, 553 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Parker v. Reonna T. Parker, 553 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Shaffner v. State, 562 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Mark T. Innerst et ux. v. Dade Cnty., 360 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- State v. Flemmings, 579 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)