DAVID K. JONES, 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.
David K. Jones appealed his conviction for first-degree murder and grand theft, challenging the five-year sentence imposed for grand theft as an improper departure from sentencing guidelines. The appellate court agreed that the trial court failed to follow mandatory procedures—reviewing a guidelines scoresheet and issuing written reasons for departure contemporaneously with sentencing—and reversed the grand theft sentence for resentencing within the guidelines while affirming the murder conviction and sentence.
The trial court's five-year grand theft sentence constituted an improper departure from the guidelines because: (1) the trial court did not have a guidelines scoresheet before it when orally pronouncing the sentence; (2) the written reasons for departure were not filed contemporaneously with the sentence; and (3) these procedural failures require reversal and remand for resentencing within the guidelines, regardless of whether the underlying reason for departure may have been valid.
[1] A trial court must review a guidelines scoresheet before imposing a sentence.
[2] Written reasons for a departure sentence must be issued contemporaneously with the sentence.
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“A trial court is required to review a guidelines scoresheet prior to the imposition of a sentence... A trial court is also required to issue written reasons for a departure sentence contemporaneous with — i.e., the same day as — the issuance of that sentence.”
Establishes the two mandatory procedural requirements for departure sentences under Florida law.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJones was convicted of first-degree murder under Florida Statutes § 782.04(l)(a)(1) and grand theft under § 812.014(2)(c). He was sentenced to 25 year…
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 Written Reasons For Departure cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Judge.
The appellant, David K. Jones, was convicted of first-degree murder, in violation of section 782.04(l)(a)(l), Florida Statutes (1987), and grand theft, in violation of section 812.014(2)(c). He was sentenced to twenty-five years’ imprisonment on the murder conviction and five years’ imprisonment for grand theft, with both sentences to run concurrently. Jones challenges his five-year sentence for grand theft, contending such was an improper departure from the guidelines. We agree and reverse.
A trial court is required to review a guidelines scoresheet prior to the imposition of a sentence. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(1); Holton v. State, 573 So. 2d 284 (Fla.1990). A trial court is also required to issue written reasons for a departure sentence contemporaneous with — i.e., the same day as — the issuance of that sentence. Ree v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla.1990); State v. Lyles, 576 So. 2d 706 (Fla.1991). See also Whitaker v. State, 597 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Failure to do so requires reversal of the departure sentence and remand for resentencing within the guidelines, regardless that the reason for the departure may have been valid. Owens v. State, 598 So. 2d 64 (Fla.1992); Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla.1990); and Whitaker v. State.
The record shows the trial court indeed did not have a guidelines scoresheet before it when it orally pronounced Jones’s sentence. The transcript of the hearing reveals the trial court had no idea how Jones scored or what the recommended or the permitted range was at the time it imposed Jones’s five-year prison term for grand theft. Further, though it cannot be determined when the scoresheet containing the written reason for departure was prepared, the record shows it was not filed until June 7, 1989 — the day after sentencing.
Based on the foregoing, we reverse the departure sentence for Jones’s grand theft conviction and remand for resentencing within the guidelines. We also note that a scrivener’s error appears on the judgment in that it reflects that Jones was convicted of first-degree murder in violation of section 784.04(l)(a), rather than section 782.-04(l)(a)(l), which is the correct statutory provision. Thus, on remand the judgment should be corrected to reflect the correct statute number. We find no merit in Jones’s second contention that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for first-degree murder. Thus, his convictions, as well as his sentence for first-degree murder, are otherwise affirmed.
SCHOONOVER, C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Adams v. State, 695 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…court’s failure to provide contemporaneous reasons in accord with Bee v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla.1990), Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla.1990) applies and the trial court cannot depart from the guidelines on remand.]. See also Jones v. State, 602 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Whitaker v. State, 597 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Accordingly, we reverse the departure sentence imposed and remand for resentencing within the guidelines. PARKER and NORTHCUTT, JJ„ concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 1990)
- REE v. State, 565 So. 2d 1329 (Fla. 1990)
- Holton v. State, 573 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 1990)
- State v. Lyles, 576 So. 2d 706 (Fla. 1991)
- Owens v. State, 598 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 1992)
- Lewis v. The Home Ins. Co. & Shams Enters., Inc., 597 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Whitaker v. State, 597 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)