ERIC FRAZIER, 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 denial of the motion to correct an illegal sentence should be reversed because two convictions were improperly scored as additional offenses on the habitual felony offender scoresheet. The court affirmed the denial of relief on remaining claims, finding them not resolvable on the face of the record.
Eric Frazier appealed the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, alleging sentencing errors. Specifically, he argued that two conviction…
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 Sentencing Guidelines Scoresheet cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Eric Frazier appeals the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence. His motion alleged numerous sentencing errors, one of which entitled him to relief under Rule 3.800(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The sentencing guidelines scoresheet shows on its face that two convictions for which Frazier was being sentenced as an habitual felony offender were" improperly scored as “additional offenses.” § 775.084(4)(e), Fla. Stat. (1993); Eaddy v. State, 626 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Ricardo v. State, 608 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). We reverse the denial of the motion on this point only and remand for resentencing based on a corrected score-sheet.
We affirm the denial of relief on the remaining claims. Since they allege sentencing errors that cannot be resolved on the face of the record, they were not proper subjects for a rule 3.800(a) motion. Af-firmance is without prejudice to raise these claims in a properly sworn post-conviction motion pursuant to Rule 3.850, within the time remaining under that rule.
GUNTHER, SHAHOOD and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cardali v. State, 794 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…3.850 motion. Florida courts have allowed Rule 3.850 to be used to seek relief for sentencing issues. See, e.g., Shropshire v. State, 775 [*723] So. 2d 349 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Jackson v. State, 762 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Frazier v. State, 762 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Reyes v. State, 752 So. 2d 139 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Hammett v. State, 746 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Johnson v. State, 715 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). The trial court found that Cardali was sentenced to an enhanced sent…
-
Johnson v. State, 824 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…the inclusion of the two additional offenses was improper. Therefore, we vacate the order denying his motion and remand for re-sentencing upon [*1013] the primary offense only, the conviction for attempted first degree murder. See Frazier v. State, 762 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). ORDER VACATED; REMANDED. THOMPSON, C.J., COBB and PETERSON, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Ricardo v. State, 608 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Bernadette Eaddy v. State, 626 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Harold D. Mall & Mary A. Mall v. Pawelski, 626 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)