TIMOTHY A. OATES, 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.
The court held that the trial court erred in using an incorrect scoresheet, failing to award earned gain time, and imposing unauthorized costs.
[1] A trial court errs in utilizing a scoresheet containing a permitted range for offenses committed before July 1, 1988.
[2] A defendant is entitled to gain time awarded on the original sentence when resentencing occurs for offenses committed prior to October 1, 1989.
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Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant's probation was revoked, and he was sentenced. He appealed the sentences, arguing errors in the scoresheet, gain time award, and imposed cos…
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 Costs Of Prosecution cases and more on FLexlaw
PARKER, Judge.
Timothy A. Oates appeals his sentences for three counts of attempted sexual battery en tered in two different cases following revocation of probation, specifically arguing that the trial court erred in failing to award gain time earned while in prison for the instant offenses, in failing to use the original score-sheet upon revocation of probation, and in imposing certain costs. We reverse.
Oates correctly argues that in sentencing him on the revocation of probation, the trial court erred in utilizing a scoresheet which contained the permitted range because he committed the instant offense in 1987. See Strickland v. State, 596 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 602 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 1992). The state concedes that offenses committed before July 1,1988, are not subject to guideline amendments which created the permitted range. Accordingly, Oates’s sentences must be reversed and remanded for resentencing utilizing the original scoresheet Oates also correctly argues that upon resentencing he is entitled to any gain time he was awarded on the original sentence because the underlying offenses were committed prior to October 1, 1989. See Svenson v. State, 631 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 639 So. 2d 982 (Fla.1994); Rice v. State, 622 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).
Further, we strike the trial court’s award of $500 for costs of prosecution. The state did not request that amount and there is no documentation to support it. Although the trial court announced the cost of prosecution during sentencing and Oates did not object, the trial court is not authorized to impose costs of prosecution without a request from the state. See § 939.01(1), Fla.Stat. (1991); Brown v. State, 652 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).
Last, the state concedes, and we agree, that the trial court improperly imposed a $15 contribution to the Hillsborough County Court Improvement Fund. See Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Accordingly, we strike that cost.
Reversed and remanded.
FRANK, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jacques F. Golden v. State, 667 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)…aring that he was imposing these investigatory costs and neither the appellant nor his counsel objected, the sentencing judge had no authority to impose these costs without a request from the state. See § 939.01(1), Fla.Stat. (1991); Oates v. State, 659 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Accordingly we strike that portion of the written orders imposing the $134. Finally, it was error for the sentencing judge to impose probation condition 16 [*935] and community control condition 20 which both require the appella…
Authorities Cited
- Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Brown v. State, 652 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Strickland v. State, 596 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Rice v. State, 622 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
- Svenson v. State, 631 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)