RALPH J. LEWIS, 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.
Ralph Lewis appealed the denial of his motion challenging the calculation of his sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The court found that Lewis stated a facially sufficient claim that the scoresheet contained two errors—improper assessment of victim injury points and incorrect prior felony classification—both of which appeared to be supported by the record. The court reversed and remanded for recalculation.
Yes. The court reversed the trial court's denial because Lewis's motion alleged facially sufficient errors that appeared supported by documents in the record, including the arrest report regarding victim injury and potentially the presentence investigation report regarding the classification of the escape conviction.
[1] Erroneous sentencing guidelines score sheet calculations may be raised at any time pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) if the alleged errors are appar…
[2] A motion to correct a sentencing scoresheet is facially sufficient if it alleges errors that, if true, would alter the recommended sentencing range.
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“Erroneous scoresheet calculations may be raised at any time pursuant to rule 3.800(a) as long as the alleged errors are apparent from the face of the record.”
Establishes the legal standard for raising scoresheet calculation errors in criminal proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1989, Lewis pled guilty to lewd assault and was sentenced to 15 years in prison based on a guidelines scoresheet showing a 12-to-17-year range. Lew…
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
WEBSTER, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of the denial of his motion, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), alleging that the trial court had incorrectly calculated his sentencing guidelines scoresheet. We conclude that appellant’s motion stated a facially sufficient claim which is not refuted by the trial court’s order. Accordingly, we reverse.
Appellant’s motion alleged that, in 1989, he pled guilty to a charge of lewd assault. It alleged, further, that he understood that he would receive a guidelines sentence. According to appellant, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison pursuant to a guidelines scoresheet which reflected a recommended range of 12 to 17 years.
Appellant claimed that the scoresheet erroneously assessed 20 points for victim injury when, in fact, there had been none; and scored two prior second-degree felonies and one third-degree felony when, in fact, it should have scored one prior second-degree felony and two third-degree felonies because he had received an escape conviction when that offense was still a third-degree felony. He also claimed that both errors were apparent from the face of the record.
Finally, he claimed that, had the scoresheet been correctly prepared, the recommended range would have been only 7 to 9 years.
The trial court denied relief, holding that neither alleged error was apparent from the face of the scoresheet and that, even if appellant were correct, the recommended and permitted sentencing ranges would remain unchanged.
Erroneous scoresheet calculations may be raised at any time pursuant to rule 3.800(a) as long as the alleged errors are apparent from the face of the record. E.g., Glanton v. State, 705 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Horton v. State, 696 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Baldwin v. State, 679 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Appellant’s motion alleges that the errors of which he complains are apparent from the face of the record. In fact, the arrest report which is a part of the record on appeal would seem to support the claim that there was no victim injury. If a presentence investigation report is also a part of the record, it might well support the claim that what was actually a third-degree felony when committed was incorrectly scored as a second-degree felony.
Finally, our calculations reflect that, if appellant’s allegations are correct, the resulting reduction in total points would result in a 2-cell reduction in the appropriate sentencing range (reducing the recommended range from 12 to 17 years to 7 to 9 years, and the permitted range from 9 to 22 years to 5% to 12 years).
The trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.
MINER, J., and SMITH, LARRY G., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Forrest Atwood v. State, 765 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…; see Orosco v. State, 730 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). “If an erroneous scoresheet calculation is apparent on the face of the record, it is renewable under rule 3.800(a).” Johnson v. State, 702 So. 2d 247, 248 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Lewis v. State, 719 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Corp v. State, 698 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Horton v. State, 696 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Thus, although scoresheet-based sentencing errors under Rule 3.800(a) need to be capable of resolution by reference to “the…
-
McCULLOUGH v. State, 777 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…wood v. State, 765 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (reversing summary denial of rule 3.800(a) motion alleging improper scoring of prior record for review of entire court record to determine if error could be resolved from the record); Lewis v. State, 719 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (reversing summary denial of rule 3.800(a) motion which alleged improper scoring of prior record for review of arrest report and presentence investigation report to determine if error could be corrected on face of record as alleg…
-
McCLAIN v. State, 157 So. 3d 528 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…ate, 765 So. 2d 242, 243 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (“If an erroneous scoresheet calculation is apparent on the face of the record, it is reviewable under rule 3.800(a).”) (quoting Johnson v. State, 702 So. 2d 247, 248 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)); Lewis v. State, 719 So. 2d 924, 925 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (reversing where the trial court denied a claim of scoresheet error on the basis that it was not apparent from the face of the scoresheet rather than considering whether the error was apparent from the face of the record); b…
Authorities Cited
- Interamerican CAR Rental, Inc. v. The Est. OF Jamaul McCLOUD, 679 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Miller Baldwin, Jr. v. State, 679 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Horton v. State, 696 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Glanton v. State, 705 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)