LINDA ANN MONROE, 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.
Linda Ann Monroe appealed her judgment and sentence for violating community control. The court affirmed the finding of violation but vacated and remanded the 1993 sentence due to an erroneous sentencing guidelines scoresheet that improperly combined 1993 and 1994 offenses, while affirming the 1994 sentence as it was consistent with a valid plea agreement.
The court held that using one scoresheet for both years was error and vacated the 1993 sentence for resentencing on a properly calculated scoresheet. However, the 1994 sentence was affirmed as harmless error because it was imposed pursuant to a valid plea agreement that would have resulted in the same 5-year prison term regardless of the scoresheet error.
[1] A sentencing guidelines scoresheet may not combine offenses from different years if statutory provisions prohibit such combination.
[2] A sentencing error is harmless if the defendant would have received the same sentence based on a valid plea agreement.
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“it was error to utilize only one sentencing guidelines scoresheet for her 1993 and 1994 crimes”
Establishes the core legal error identified by the court regarding proper application of sentencing guidelines
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMonroe was sentenced for crimes in 1993 (child abuse) and 1994. At sentencing, the trial court used a single sentencing guidelines scoresheet combinin…
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 Scoresheet Calculation cases and more on FLexlaw
MICKLE, Judge.
This is an appeal of a judgment and sentence imposed upon the appellant’s violation of community control.
We affirm the finding of a violation of community control. The appellant contends, and the state concedes, that it was error to utilize only one sentencing guidelines scoresheet for her 1993 and 1994 crimes. See § 921.001(4)(b)l-2, Fla.Stat. (Supp.1994); Tubwell v. State, 661 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Heath v. State, 656 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
Because the removal of the 1994 offenses from the 1993 scoresheet reduces the total points by 12 and results in a lowering of the sentencing range by one cell, see Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.988(i), we vacate the sentence for the 1993 offense (child abuse) in Circuit Court Case No. 93-5850 and remand for resentencing upon a properly calculated scoresheet. Sellers v. State, 578 So .2d 339, 341 (Fla. 1st DCA), aff'd, 586 So. 2d 340 (Fla.1991); White v. State, 537 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).
We affirm the sentence imposed on the 1994 offenses in Circuit Court Case No. 94-297, for the 5-year prison sentence imposed upon revocation of community control accords with the terms of the appellant’s valid written amended plea agreement. Under the terms of that agreement, the appellant agreed to 5 years in state prison, to be suspended pending successful completion of 2 years of community control. As stated, she failed to complete the community control program. We are clearly convinced that the appellant would have received the same sentence for these 1994 offenses, notwithstanding the scoresheet error, because the sentence was imposed in accordance with the valid plea agreement.
Accordingly, any error in imposing the 5-year prison term based on the use of a single scoresheet is harmless error. Sellers, 578 So. 2d at 341; Orsi v. State, 515 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
On remand, the trial court should correct the written judgment to reflect that the third-degree felony to which the appellant pled and for which she was sentenced is child abuse, not “aggravated child abuse.” Smith v. State, 661 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). The lower tribunal is directed to enter an explanatory written order of revocation conforming to its oral pronouncements. Jones v. State, 638 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
AFFIRMING violation of community control, VACATING AND REMANDING FOR RESENTENCING in Circuit Court Case No. 93-5850, AFFIRMING the sentence in Circuit Court Case No. 94-297, and directing the lower court to correct the crime listed on the judgment and to enter a written order of revocation.
MINER and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Carter v. State, 586 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1991)
- Louie Anthony Sellers v. State, 578 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Jones v. State, 638 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
- Liddy Ann Heath v. State, 656 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Roberts, 515 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Orsi v. State, 515 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Tubwell v. State, 661 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Branham v. State, 537 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- Katadrew Jamon Smith v. State, 661 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)