BARRY PARRISH, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
BARRY PARRISH, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
617 So. 2d 1170
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1993)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion of the Court
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from a sentence in an aggravated battery case. Appellant was on probation for the aggravated battery and violated terms of his probation. When he came to court for sentencing the judge used a new, revised, updated sentencing guideline scoresheet to find the proper allowable sentence. This was error. The original scoresheet should have been used; the one prepared and used at his original sentencing hearing when he got probation. Holloman v. State, 600 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).
SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED for RESENTENCING.
W. SHARP and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harris v. State, 771 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…aims that his current sentence is illegal because it ex [*567] ceeds the statutory maximum. When sentencing after a violation of probation, the trial court must use the original scoresheet to determine the appropriate sentence. See Parrish v. State, 617 So. 2d 1170, 1170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Holloman v. State, 600 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Normally, a defendant’s guideline sentence may be increased by one cell for each violation of probation. See Williams v. State, 594 So. 2d 273 (Fla.1992); Poore v. Sta…
-
Wilson v. State, 648 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…had it considered an accurate scoresheet”). In addition, the trial court erred at the sentencing for Wilson’s violation of probation by using a newly prepared scoresheet instead of the original scoresheet with a one-cell bump. See Parrish v. State, 617 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). On remand, the trial court should use the original scoresheet with a two-cell bump, one for each successive violation. See Williams v. State, 594 So. 2d 273 (Fla.1992). Reversed and remanded for resentencing in accordance with…
-
Smith v. State, 629 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…as a habitual felony offender; we affirm those. The State concedes that the use of a new scoresheet to sentence Smith on the three cases enumerated above was error. Holloman v. State, 600 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); see also Parrish v. State, 617 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). It argues, however, that the error is harmless because Smith received no more than 15 years on the violation of probation cases and he could have received 21 years (consecutive sentences of seven years, the maximum permitted ran…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Holloman v. State, 600 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)