ROGER COOPER, 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 a single scoresheet for two offenses that occurred under different versions of the sentencing guidelines.
Appellant pleaded guilty to two aggravated batteries occurring on different dates. The trial court used a single scoresheet for both offenses, despite…
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 Preparation cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, J.
We grant Appellant’s motion for clarification. Accordingly, we withdraw out previously issued opinion and substitute the following in its place:
Appellant appeals his sentences in case numbers 96-20994 CF 10A and 96-21044 CF 10A. We reverse Appellant’s sentences and remand for re-sentencing.
Appellant was charged by separate informations with two aggravated batteries; one occurring on January 15, 1996, and the other on October 14, 1996. He entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to concurrent terms of nineteen years in prison, which was suspended. He violated his community control and was sentenced to the nineteen years. The trial court used a single scoresheet to score each of his separate offenses. This was error because the crimes took place under different versions of the guidelines. See § 921.001(4)(b)4, Fla. Stat. (1995); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.703(d)(3).
Appellant committed one offense before and one after October 1,1996, the effective date for applying the multiplier used in the scoresheet.1 Accordingly, the trial court should have prepared one scoresheet for the offense that occurred before October 1, 1996, and a separate scoresheet for the offense that occurred after that date. See Dillard v. State, 728 So. 2d 725 (Fla.1999).
Using separate scoresheets, the guidelines sentence would be within the 15-year statutory maximum. See § 775.082(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (1995).
Furthermore, we reject the state’s contention that the law of the case requires us to affirm. Although Appellant’s sentences were addressed by this court in Cooper v. State, 717 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), this issue was not resolved in that appeal.
KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur. . We note that the validity of the multiplier is not at issue here. See O.C. v. State, 722 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), rev. granted, 727 So. 2d 911 (Fla.1999).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cruller v. State, 808 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 2002)…ments of proof. 2. Offenses which are degrees of the same offense as provided by statute. 3. Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense. . It is important to note that in Brown v. State, 743 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), Mason v. State, 665 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), Smart v. State, 652 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), and Waters v. State, 542 So. 2d 1371 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), there are insufficient facts recited in the district court opinions…
-
Butler v. State, 753 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…urts, has consistently held that double jeopardy does not bar convictions and sentences for both robbery and carjacking. See Cruller v. State, 745 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Consiglio v. State 743 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Brown v. State, 743 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Simboli v. State, 728 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 741 So. 2d 1137 (Fla.1999); Smart v. State, 652 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 660 So. 2d 714 (Fla.1995); Waters v. State, 542 So. 2d 1371 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).…
-
Profitt v. State, 789 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ng. The sentencing court may impose such sentence concurrently or consecutively. Use of a single scoresheet to score each separate offense is error, where the crimes took place under different versions of sentencing guidelines. See Cooper v. State, 743 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Accordingly, to decide his Heggs claim, on remand the trial .court should have a 1994 sentencing guideline scoresheet prepared showing only those offenses from 1996, as they would have appeared on the lost scoresheet. For Prof…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sherod Dillard v. State, 728 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1999)
- Cooper v. State, 717 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- O. C. v. State, 722 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)