MICHAEL LEE BOLAND, 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.
Michael Lee Boland appeals a sentencing guidelines scoresheet that awarded forty points for victim injury in a lewd and lascivious assault case. The court agreed that no evidence of physical injury was charged or proven, making the points improper, and reversed and remanded for resentencing.
The trial court erred in assessing forty points for victim injury because the information did not allege physical injury and the state did not claim that the record contained evidence of physical injury. The error cannot be deemed harmless because the scoresheet error affected the sentencing range calculations and the trial judge stated on the record that he had no discretion outside the guidelines range.
[1] A trial court errs in assessing victim injury points on a sentencing guidelines scoresheet when the charging document does not allege physical injury to the victims.
[2] A sentencing error based on an incorrect scoresheet calculation is not harmless when the trial court indicates its sentencing decision was constrained by the erroneous ca…
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“The state does not claim that the record contains any evidence of physical injury to the victims. Instead, it appears that the parties agree that the only indication of injury to the victims was that reflected in the information charging lewd and lascivious assault.”
Establishes that no physical injury was proven or alleged, making the victim injury points improper on the sentencing scoresheet.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBoland was charged with two counts of lewd and lascivious assault on children under age sixteen. He entered a nolo contendere plea agreement in Januar…
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 Victim Injury Points cases and more on FLexlaw
DELL, Judge.
Michael Lee Boland appeals from an order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. He challenges the trial court’s assessment of forty points against him on his sentencing guidelines scoresheet for victim injury. He argues that the state failed to charge or prove physical injury to the victims in this case. We agree and reverse and remand for resentencing.
The information charged appellant with two counts of lewd and lascivious assault on a child under the age of sixteen years in violation of section 800.04, Florida Statutes (1987). The information charged that he committed the offenses between July 1, 1987 and September 30, 1989 as to one victim and between March 1, 1987 and August 1, 1987 as to the other victim. Appellant entered into a written nolo contendere plea agreement. The plea agreement recited that the prosecutor agreed to a sentence of four and one-half years in prison followed by ten years probation and other conditions. The court adjudicated appellant guilty of both counts of lewd and lascivious assault, and on January 31, 1991, sentenced him to three and one-half years in prison with ten years probation on each count to run concurrently. Appellant did not file a direct appeal and his sentence became final in March of 1991.
The state does not claim that the record contains any evidence of physical injury to the victims. Instead, it appears that the parties agree that the only indication of injury to the victims was that reflected in the information charging lewd and lascivious assault. The information specifically recited the type of contact appellant allegedly had with the two victims. It does not contain any allegation of physical injury. The trial court, therefore, erred when it assessed forty points against appellant on his sentencing guidelines scoresheet for victim injury. See Karchesky v. State, 591 So. 2d 930 (Fla.1992).
The trial court’s calculation, including the victim injury points, placed appellant in a two-cell higher category in the guidelines matrix than he would have been without the extra points. Reducing his score by forty points would change the original recommended range of four and one-half to five and one-half years to a range of two and one-half to three and one-half years. The reduction would also change the permitted range from three and one-half to seven years to a permitted range of community control or one to four and one-half years. Although the trial court sentenced appellant within the correct permitted and recommended ranges, we cannot deem the inclusion of victim injury points on the scoresheet as harmless error. At sentencing, based on the erroneous scoresheet calculations, the trial court stated:
Mr. Boland, I am sure your attorney has explained this to you and I have. I don’t have any discretion in this matter other than 3V2 - 7 years unless there is a clear legal reason for departure which I don’t find in this case.
In view of the trial judge’s comments, we cannot assume that the trial court would have rendered the same sentence in the absence of the scoresheet error. See Sellers v. State, 578 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA), approved on other grounds, 586 So. 2d 340 (Fla.1991).
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion to correct an illegal sentence. We remand this cause to the trial court with directions to correct appellant’s guidelines scoresheet and for resentencing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
FARMER, J., concurs.
WARNER, J., concurs specially with opinion.
WARNER, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur because I think the Supreme Court settled this issue in Karchesky v. State, 591 So. 2d 930 (Fla.1992). However, as a result of that decision, the legislature amended the sentencing law to make clear that in the calculation of guidelines victim injury includes sexual contact regardless of whether there is physical trauma. See § 921.001(8), Fla.Stat. (1992). That amendment cannot be retroactively applied to this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Harrelson v. State, 616 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…o noted that the legislature has effectively overruled the Karchesky decision. Ch. 92-135, § 1, Laws of Fla. While this is so, the amended statute cannot be applied in, this case. Morales v. State, 613 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Boland v. State, 613 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (Warner, J., concurring). After remand the trial court may again deny the motion if, after review of the files and records or an evidentiary hearing, it is established that actual injury occurred in this case. Morris. If, on the…
-
Singleton v. State, 620 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…battery counts. Even though Singleton's sentence is within the new permitted range, the scoresheet error in this case cannot be harmless because the court originally sentenced him to a term at the low end of the permitted range. See Boland v. State, 613 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Because the court did not have the benefit of Karchesky at sentencing, however, it may impose a departure sentence on remand if supported by appropriate reasons. Id. Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing. RYDER, A.C.J., and…
-
Royce Glenn Harper v. State, 632 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…review denied, 624 So. 2d 268 (Fla.1993); Jones v. State, 615 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Lane v. State, 613 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Morales v. State, 613 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 3d DCA), revieiv denied, 623 So. 2d 494 (Fla.1993); Boland v. State 613 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 624 So. 2d 268 (Fla.1993); State v. Stone, 608 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Wallen v. State, 606 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Beasley v. State, 605 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), review denied, 614 So. 2d 503 (Fla…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Karchesky v. State, 591 So. 2d 930 (Fla. 1992)
- Carter v. State, 586 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 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)