BILLY D. PRESCOTT, 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.
Billy Prescott appealed the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, challenging both a sentencing guidelines scoresheet error and his overall sentence length. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed in part regarding the scoresheet error but affirmed the denial of relief regarding the statutory maximum claim.
The court reversed the trial court's denial of relief regarding the scoresheet error and remanded for the trial court to attach documentation proving the error was harmless or to resentence Prescott based on a corrected scoresheet. The court affirmed the denial of relief regarding the statutory maximum claim, holding that under section 810.02(2)(a), burglary with assault is a first-degree felony punishable by any term of years not exceeding life imprisonment, and Prescott's sentence did not exceed this statutory maximum.
[1] A trial court must attach portions of the record demonstrating that a sentencing guidelines scoresheet error is harmless when denying a motion to correct an illegal sente…
[2] Supplementation of the appellate record does not cure a trial court's failure to attach required documentation when ruling on a motion to correct an illegal sentence.
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 phrase 'punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life' is not a life felony, but a first-degree felony providing for any term of years not exceeding life imprisonment”
Establishes the court's interpretation that burglary with assault provides statutory authority for sentences up to life imprisonment without being classified as a mandatory life felony
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePrescott pled guilty in 1990 to four counts: burglary with assault, battery, lewd assault, and resisting arrest with violence. He received a sentence …
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 Supplementation Of Appellate Record cases and more on FLexlaw
PARIENTE, Judge.
Appellant, Billy Prescott, appeals an order that denied his rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. He originally pled guilty in 1990 to four counts: burglary with assault; battery; lewd assault; and resisting arrest with violence. He received a sentence of twenty-five years imprisonment followed by twenty years probation. He now claims that his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum for the burglary (the most serious offense), and further claims that his sentencing guidelines seoresheet includes an error. The state concedes that Prescott’s sentencing guidelines seoresheet improperly listed two different crimes as primary offenses, but maintains that the error was harmless. According to the state, the sentence would be within the permitted range even with the correction.
The state did not file a response in the proceedings before the trial court and the trial court’s order denying the motion did not attach either the seoresheet or any other documentation from the record conclusively demonstrating that the error was harmless. The state has attempted to cure this deficiency by filing a copy of the seoresheet with this court. However, supplementation of the record on appeal does not cure the trial court’s failure to comply with the requirement of rule 9.140(g) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Saunders v. State, 661 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Foley v. State, 657 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Cherry v. State, 638 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
We therefore reverse the trial court’s denial of relief pertaining to the seoresheet error and remand to the trial court for attachment of portions of the record demonstrating that the seoresheet error does not affect Prescott’s sentence, or failing such proof, to re-sentence him based on a corrected score-sheet.
As to defendant’s claim that his sentence exceeded the statutory maximum, section 810.02(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that if the defendant commits an assault or battery upon any person in the course of the burglary, the offense is a first-degree felony “punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life.” This court has explained that the phrase “punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life” is not a life felony, but a first-degree felony providing for any term of years not exceeding life imprisonment. See § 775.082(3)(b); Robinson v. State, 642 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Mills v. State, 642 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Crabtree v. State, 624 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Salas v. State, 589 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Because defendant’s sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum, we affirm the denial of relief on that claim.
POLEN and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sheffield v. State, 903 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…71. We also reiterate the prior authority of this court that holds that the state cannot supplement a summary denial on appeal in order to prevent the reversal of the order. See McCray v. State, 633 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Prescott v. State, 698 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Even if it could supplement the record, the documents provided with the state’s motion for rehearing do not address the lengths of the various portions of Sheffield’s instant sentences to refute his Grant claim. As no other rat…
-
Braun v. State, 789 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ly affect Braun’s sentence. The trial court, however, provided no record attachments, including the revised scoresheet, that conclusively refuted Braun’s claim that his sentence was adversely affected by the scoresheet error. In Prescott v. State, 698 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), the defendant appealed an order denying his rule 3.800 motion, and as in the present case, the state conceded that a guidelines scoresheet error existed but argued the error was harmless, because even if a corrected scoresheet w…
-
Bigham v. State, 761 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…lusion of the points did not adversely affect Bigham’s sentence.1 The trial court however provided no record attachments that conclusively refute Bigham’s claim that his sentence was adversely affected by the scoresheet error. In Prescott v. State, 698 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), the defendant appealed an order denying his rale 3.800 motion, and as in the present case, the State conceded that a guidelines scoresheet error existed, but argued the error was harmless because, even if a corrected scoresheet…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mills v. State, 642 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Stecker v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 589 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Crabtree v. State, 624 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
- Mickey L. Saunders v. State, 661 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Reyes v. State, 642 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Foley v. State, 657 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Hyatt Hotel & Alexsis Risk Mgmt. v. Lalu, 638 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)