ROBERT A. NAPIER, 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.
Robert Napier appealed his sentences, which were calculated using a sentencing guidelines methodology that the court found to be erroneous. The court vacated his sentences and remanded for resentencing with corrected charges reflecting burglary of a dwelling (second-degree felony) rather than burglary of a structure (third-degree felony).
The sentencing guidelines calculation was erroneous and Napier's sentences must be vacated and remanded for resentencing. Upon remand, the convictions should be corrected to reflect burglary of a dwelling (second-degree felonies) rather than burglary of a structure (third-degree felonies).
[1] Sentences imposed based on a sentencing guidelines point total calculated by multiplying legal constraint points by the number of felony convictions must be vacated and r…
[2] Upon remand for resentencing, a guidelines scoresheet must be corrected to reflect the proper classification of felony convictions, such as burglary of a dwelling as a se…
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“Robert Napier appeals the sentences imposed upon him based upon a sentencing guidelines point total calculated by multiplying the number of points assessed for legal constraint by the number of his felony convictions.”
Establishes the core sentencing methodology error being challenged on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobert Napier was convicted of six counts of burglary. His sentencing guidelines point total was calculated by multiplying points assessed for legal c…
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 Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
JOANOS, Chief Judge.
Robert Napier appeals the sentences imposed upon him based upon a sentencing guidelines point total calculated by multiplying the number of points assessed for legal constraint by the number of his felony convictions. The state recognizes that this court’s decisions require that appellant’s sentence be vacated, and the case remanded for resentencing. See Wilson v. State, 580 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 1st DCA1991); Sellers v. State, 578 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Accord Scott v. State, 574 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), jurisdiction accepted, decision pending, State v. Scott, 581 So. 2d 1310 (Fla.1991); Lewis v. State, 574 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), jurisdiction accepted, State v. Lewis, 580 So. 2d 753 (Fla.1991); Cabrera v. State, 576 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
However, the state maintains that if the issue is remanded for resentencing, the guidelines score-sheet should be corrected to reflect that appellant was convicted of six counts of burglary of a dwelling, a second degree felony, rather than burglary of a structure, a third degree felony.
We agree.
Accordingly, appellant’s sentences are vacated and the cause is remanded for re-sentencing, pursuant to this court’s decisions in Wilson and in Sellers. Upon remand, the guidelines scoresheet should be corrected to reflect convictions for the second degree felony of burglary of a dwelling, as opposed to the third degree felony of burglary of a structure. In addition, we certify that our resolution of the issue in this case is in direct conflict with decisions of the fourth and fifth district courts of appeal in Carter v. State, 571 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), jurisdiction accepted, 581 So. 2d 163 (Fla.1991); and Walker v. State, 546 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).
ERVIN and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Walker v. State, 546 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Lewis v. State, 574 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Louie Anthony Sellers v. State, 578 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Fernandez v. Efigenia Nancy Fernandez, 578 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Scott v. State, 574 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Cabrera v. State, 576 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Fla. Perfections, Inc. v. J & D Fin. Corp., 571 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Carter v. State, 571 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Wilson v. State, 580 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)