BRETT RABURN WILLIAMS, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed a probation violation sentence because the trial court erred in assessing twelve points for community sanction violation under the sentencing guidelines, as two distinct violations of a single sanction do not constitute successive violations under Rule 3.703(d)(17).
Two distinct violations of a single community sanction do not constitute successive violations under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.703(d)(17), and the correct scoresheet assessment is six points rather than twelve.
[1] Two distinct violations of a single community sanction do not constitute successive violations within the meaning of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.703(d)(17), whic…
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 intelligence“A successive violation, by the clear terms of the rule, must follow a prior violation resulting in the continuation of supervision or the modification or revocation of it.”
Court explaining the proper interpretation of successive violations under Rule 3.703(d)(17)
Brett Raburn Williams was sentenced following a violation of probation, with the trial court assessing twelve points on the sentencing guidelines scor…
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 Community Sanction Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Brett Raburn Williams appeals his sentence imposed following a violation of probation. We agree with him that the assessment of twelve points on his sentencing guidelines scoresheet for community sanction violation is erroneous, and that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.703(d)(17) does not contemplate that two distinct violations of a single community sanction constitute “successive violations” within the meaning of that rule. A successive violation, by the clear terms of the rule, must follow a prior violation resulting in the continuation of supervision or the modification or revocation of it. The presumptive sentence under a corrected scoresheet will not involve a state prison sanction, so it cannot be said that the same sentence would have been imposed absent the error we here correct. See Annunziata v. State, 697 So. 2d 997, 999 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Huffman v. State, 611 So. 2d 2, 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (holding that resentencing is unnecessary in light of scoresheet error only if court determines that error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt). Accordingly, we vacate Williams’ sentence and remand for resentencing with a corrected scoresheet which reflects only six points for community sanction violation.
Reversed and remanded.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
State v. Anderson, 905 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2005)…o. 2d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (reversing for resentencing because the court could not “conclude with certainty that appellant’s sentence would have been the same if the trial court had used a properly prepared scoresheet”); Williams v. State, 720 So. 2d 590, 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (remanding for resentencing with a corrected scoresheet because “it cannot be said that the same sentence would have been imposed absent the error we here correct”); Annunziata v. State, 697 So. 2d 997, 999 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997…
-
Cherington v. State, 24 So. 3d 658 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…endant is sentenced to state prison and “[t]he presumptive sentence under a corrected scoresheet will not involve a state prison sanction, ... it cannot be said that the same sentence would have been imposed absent the error.... ” Williams v. State, 720 So. 2d 590, 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); see also Ray v. State, 987 So. 2d 155, 156 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (holding that when the trial court sentenced the defendant to prison under the belief that the lowest permissible sentence was a prison term but the lowest permi…
-
RAY v. State, 987 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…trial court sentenced the appellant under the mistaken belief that the lowest permissible sentence was 24.7 months’ imprisonment. We cannot say that the same sentence would have been imposed if the scoresheet had been correct. See Williams v. State, 720 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (holding that error on scoresheet is not harmless when presumptive sentence under corrected score-sheet would be any non-state prison sanction). Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s convictions but reverse and remand for the trial…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Huffman v. State, 611 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Carmine Annunziata v. State, 697 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)