JEROME EVERETT BUNCH, 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.
Jerome Bunch appealed his sentences for escape and other felonies imposed after probation revocation. The appellate court vacated and remanded for resentencing because the trial court used an incorrect sentencing guideline category and imposed illegal sentences exceeding the statutory maximum for third-degree felonies.
The sentences were vacated because: (1) escape as a primary offense must be scored under category eight, not category nine, guidelines; and (2) the 7-year sentences for third-degree felonies exceeded the 5-year statutory maximum penalty. The case was remanded for resentencing using the correct category eight scoresheet.
[1] Escape convictions must be scored under category eight of the sentencing guidelines when listed as primary offenses.
[2] A sentencing scoresheet prepared using an incorrect category results in an improper sentencing range.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Had Bunch been sentenced with a category eight scoresheet, with escape as the primary offense, his recommended range would have been community control or 12-30 months incarceration. The scoresheet actually used (a category 9 scoresheet) put Bunch in the recommended range of 7 to 9 years — quite a 'departure' from that provided in the category 8 scoresheet.”
Demonstrates the significant sentencing disparity resulting from using the wrong guideline category
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBunch was revoked from probation and convicted of escape and six third-degree felonies. The trial court sentenced him to 7 years for escape and concur…
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 Primary Offense Scoring cases and more on FLexlaw
W. SHARP, Judge.
Bunch appeals from the sentences he received for escape,1 and six other offenses (third degree felonies) after revocation of his probation. He was sentenced to 7 years for escape, and concurrent 7-year terms for the other offenses. We vacate the sentences and remand for resentencing.
The sentencing guideline scoresheet adopted by the trial court listed escape as the primary offense. The prior offenses for which Bunch had been placed on probation were scored as prior record. Cf. Fletcher v. State, 593 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). A category nine scoresheet form (“all other felony offenses”) was prepared. However, as of October 1, 1986, escape convictions listed as primary offenses must be scored under category eight. See Ch. 86-273, § 2, Laws of Fla. (approved amendments to guidelines adopted by Supreme Court of Florida); The Florida Bar Re: Rules of Criminal Procedure (Sentencing Guidelines 3.701, 3.988), 482 So. 2d 311 (Fla.1985).
Had Bunch been sentenced with a category eight scoresheet, with escape as the primary offense, his recommended range would have been community control or 12-30 months incarceration. The scoresheet actually used (a category 9 scoresheet) put Bunch in the recommended range of 7 to 9 years — quite a “departure” from that provided in the category 8 scoresheet. Further, although not raised by Bunch on appeal, it appears the 7-year sentences he received for the third degree felonies were illegal, as the maximum statutory penalty for third degree felonies is 5 years.2
Accordingly, we vacate the appealed sentences and remand this case to the trial court for resentencing after preparation of a category 8 scoresheet. Bunch should also then be sentenced for resisting a law enforcement officer without violence, a charge for which he was orally adjudicated guilty, together with the escape offense, but for which he apparently was not sentenced. Since the trial judge initially intended to impose a guideline sentence, on remand he has the option of imposing a departure sentence if supported by valid written reasons. See State v. Vanhorn, 561 So. 2d 584 (Fla.1990); State v. Betancourt, 552 So. 2d 1107 (Fla.1989).
Sentences VACATED; REMANDED.
DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur. . § 944.40, Fla.Stat. (1989).
. § 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1989).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Betancourt, 552 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1989)
- The Fla. Bar re: Rules of Crim. Procedure (sentencing Guidelines, 482 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 1985)
- State v. Vanhorn, 561 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1990)
- State v. Randley, 593 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Fletcher v. State, 593 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)