SIMON BARNETT, JR., 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.
Appellant's sentences were reversed because the trial court failed to properly score the sentencing guidelines by dismissing some probation violation affidavits instead of following the required procedure of preparing separate scoresheets and using the one recommending the most severe sanction.
The sentencing guidelines require preparation of separate scoresheets for each offense, with the most severe scoresheet as primary and other pending offenses scored as additional offenses, not dismissed.
[1] Sentencing guidelines require preparation of separate scoresheets for each pending offense at conviction, with the scoresheet recommending the most severe sanction design…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSimon Barnett, Jr. violated probation and faced sentencing on multiple pending offenses. The state attorney attempted to manipulate the scoresheet by …
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 At Conviction cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Chief Judge.
Simon Barnett, Jr., has appealed from the sentences imposed upon him after he violated probation. Because the offenses pending for sentencing were not properly scored, we reverse and remand for resentencing pursuant to the appropriate guidelines procedure.
The state attorney at sentencing engaged in a novel but confusing attempt to manipulate the scoresheet to increase the period of Barnett’s punishment by dismissing some of the affidavits of violation of probation. The sentencing guidelines, however, require that the primary offense at conviction be that which, when scored on the guidelines scoresheet, recommends the most severe sanction. Rule 3.701(d)(3), Fla.R.Crim.P. The state attorney is to prepare a separate guidelines scoresheet for each offense, scoring prior record appropriately, then to use the scoresheet which recommends the most severe sentencing range. Rule 3.701(d)(3)(A) & (B), Fla.R.Crim.P. Any other pending offenses are to be scored as additional offenses at conviction. Rule 3.701(d)(4), Fla. R.Crim.P. Our court recently confirmed the necessity of following this procedure in Grady v. State, 618 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). On remand, the court is to sentence Barnett pursuant to the scoresheet that recommends the harshest sentence and which takes into account all violations of probation that are pending at the time of sentencing.
Reversed and remanded.
CAMPBELL and FULMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Loesch, 726 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…iling to score an additional four points for legal status violation. See State v. Lamar, 659 So. 2d 262, 265 (Fla.1995)(new offense must be scored as either primary or additional offense, whichever results in most severe sanction); Barnett v. State, 642 So. 2d 575, 575 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)(scoresheet must take into account all probation violations pending at sentencing); Kelly v. State, 706 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)(trial court must include both legal status points and community sanction violation points f…
Authorities Cited
- Isaiah Johnson Grady v. State, 618 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)