REGINALD S. WHITE, 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.
Reginald S. White appealed the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), claiming his sentence was illegal because the trial court used a new scoresheet rather than the original one. The appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial judge failed to attach to his order any portion of the files or record refuting White's allegations, making proper review impossible.
The court reversed the trial court's summary denial and remanded the case because the trial judge failed to attach portions of the files or record refuting White's allegations, preventing proper appellate review. The court held that scoresheet errors can be raised in rule 3.800(a) motions and that without record documentation, the appellate court could not determine whether White's claims had merit.
[1] A motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) may address scoresheet errors, including the use of the wrong scoresheet.
[2] A scoresheet error can be raised in a motion to correct an illegal sentence if the defendant was sentenced under the guidelines.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Because the trial judge did not attach to his order denying the motion any portion of the files or record refuting White's allegations, we are unable to conclude that White is not entitled to relief on his second and third claims.”
Establishes the procedural requirement that trial courts must attach supporting documentation when denying motions under rule 3.800(a)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWhite was found in violation of his probation and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. White claimed his sentence was illegal because the trial co…
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 Scoresheet Error cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1235] PER CURIAM.
Reginald S. White appeals from the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). There is no merit to White’s first claim. Because the trial judge did not attach to his order denying the motion any portion of the files or record refuting White’s allegations, we are unable to conclude that White is not entitled to relief on his second and third claims.
After having been found in violation of his probation, White was sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. White’s second and third claims involve his contention that his sentence is illegal because the court used a new scoresheet, rather that the original scoresheet. The use of no scoresheet or the wrong scoresheet is a “scoresheet error” that can be raised in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Schneider v. State, 512 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Dupont v. State, 514 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). An additional problem in this case is that it appears that the appellant’s offense was committed prior to the effective date of the sentencing guidelines. If so, White’s claims would only have merit if he had affirmatively elected guidelines sentencing at the time of his sentencing. Without any information from the record, this court is unable to properly review the claims.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, the trial court should first determine whether White was sentenced under the guidelines. If he was, and there was a correct score-sheet, the attachment of the scoresheet to the court’s order should support denial of the motion. If White did not elect guidelines sentencing, and was not sentenced under the guidelines, portions of the record in support thereof should be attached to the court’s order. If the court files do not refute White’s contentions, a proper score-sheet must be prepared and White must be resentenced. If the court should again deny appellant’s motion, he has thirty days in which to appeal.
Reversed and remanded.
SCHOONOVER, C.J., and PATTERSON and BLUE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Dupont v. State, 514 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Schneider v. State, 512 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)