STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
RONALD WORLEY, RESPONDENT; STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, V. THOMAS M. SCOTT, RESPONDENT; STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, V. RICKY LEWIS, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Legal Constraint Points cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the consolidated cases of Worley v. State, 573 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), Lewis v. State, 574 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), and Scott v. State, 574 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), in which the Second District Court of Appeal directly conflicts with the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Flowers v. State, 567 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution.
We recently held in Flowers v. State, 586 So. 2d 1058 (Fla.1991), that legal constraint points are to be assessed once in calculating sentencing scoresheets for offenses committed while on legal constraint. Accordingly, we approve of the decisions below.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J. and OVERTON, McDonald, barkett, grimes, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fredrick M. Lawrence v. State, 590 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…’s sentence fell within the reduced permitted range, scoresheet error should be corrected and not viewed as harmless merely because a departure sentence did not result); Lewis v. State, 574 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), approved in State v. Worley, 586 So. 2d 338 (Fla.1991) (incorrect score not harmless error even though sentence still within permitted range); Green v. State, 569 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (court must consider recommended range before sentencing to permitted range; miscalculation require…
-
Seccia v. State, 786 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…vision 12 of Jacksonville, Inc., 730 So. 2d 795, 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Moreover, the rule of lenity requires that any ambiguity in the guidelines be construed in favor of the defendant. Lewis v. State, 574 So. 2d 245, 246 (Fla. 2d DCA), approved, 586 So. 2d 338 (Fla.1991). Second, if the phrase “any offense pending before the court for sentencing” were interpreted to include capital felonies, one would also have to score capital felonies as “additional offenses” on the scoresheet because the rule defines…
-
Cary J. Campbell v. State, 588 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…urt’s recent decision in Flowers v. State, 586 So. 2d 1058 (Fla.1991), most recently applied in Banegas v. State, 586 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1991); Rivera v. State, 586 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 1991); State v. Sellers, 586 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1991); Ricks v. State, 586 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 1991); Jackson v. State, 586 So. 2d 1061 (Fla.1991); Fields v. State, 586 So. 2d 341 (Fla.1991); State v. Worley, 586 So. 2d 338 (Fla.1991); Carter v. State, 586 So. 2d 340 (Fla.1991). Any past uncertainty with respect to multiplying the legal…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Flowers v. State, 586 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 1991)
- Flowers v. State, 567 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Lewis v. State, 574 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Scott v. State, 574 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Worley v. State, 573 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)