WALTER LEE HOPPS, 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.
The court affirmed the revocation of probation based on sufficient evidence but reversed the sentencing because the trial court improperly used a new scoresheet instead of the original scoresheet, resulting in longer sentences.
A trial court must use the original sentencing scoresheet when revoking probation unless the defendant affirmatively misrepresented his prior criminal history at the original sentencing.
[1] A trial court must use the original sentencing scoresheet when revoking probation unless the defendant affirmatively misrepresented his prior criminal history at the orig…
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 intelligenceWalter Lee Hopps was found guilty of violating the terms and conditions of his probation. At resentencing following revocation, the trial court used a…
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 Appellate Waiver cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, Walter Lee Hopps, challenges the judgments and sentences imposed upon him after he was found guilty of violating the terms and conditions of his probation. We find that the state presented sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s finding that the appellant violated his probation and, accordingly, affirm the order revoking his probation.
The trial court erred, however, by using a new scoresheet for the sentencing following revocation of his probation. Utilizing the new scoresheet resulted in longer sentences. The record does not reflect that the appellant affirmatively misrepresented his prior criminal history at the original sentencing hearing, and the court, accordingly, was bound to use the original score-sheet. Manuel v. State, 582 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Goene v. State, 577 So. 2d 1306 (Fla.1991). Furthermore, since the two scoresheets, which are part of the record in this case, establish sentencing errors which are apparent on the face of the record, the appellant did not waive his right to appeal the sentences. Forehand v. State, 537 So. 2d 103 (Fla.1989); State v. Whitfield, 487 So. 2d 1045 (Fla.1986).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing.
SCHOONOVER, C.J., and DANAHY and PARKER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Raymond v. State, 627 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…ing him based on a new scoresheet rather than on the original score-sheet, and points to well-settled law providing that when sentencing a defendant for a violation of probation, the trial court is to use the original scoresheet. See Hopps v. State, 590 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), cause dismissed, 595 So. 2d 557 (Fla.1992); Pfeiffer v. State, 568 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Graham v. State, 559 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). The state concedes error. Based on the foregoing authority, we reverse and re…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Whitfield, 487 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 1986)
- Goene v. State, 577 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 1991)
- Forehand v. State, 537 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 1989)
- Manuel v. State, 582 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)