CHARLES DEGESO, 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.
Charles DeGeso appealed his convictions for trafficking in cocaine, passing a worthless check, and failure to appear. The court affirmed the convictions but reversed the sentences, remanding for resentencing based on errors in prior record scoring and the trial court's failure to exercise discretion regarding credit for time served in another jurisdiction.
The court affirmed all convictions but reversed the sentences. The State failed to meet its burden of producing competent evidence to support the four prior record points, requiring resentencing with a new scoresheet. The trial court has inherent discretionary authority to award credit for time served in other jurisdictions while awaiting transfer to Florida if the defendant was held solely because of the Florida offense, and the trial court must consider this discretion on remand.
[1] When the defense challenges prior convictions and the accuracy of the score-sheet, the state bears the burden of producing competent evidence of the disputed conviction.
[2] A trial court must use a sentencing scoresheet that corresponds to the offense dates when the sentencing guidelines in effect at the time of the offense have been declare…
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“When the defense challenges prior convictions and the accuracy of the score-sheet, the state has the burden of producing competent evidence of the disputed conviction.”
Establishes the burden of proof standard for prior conviction scoring in sentencing
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDeGeso was convicted of two counts of trafficking in cocaine, passing a worthless check, and failure to appear. At sentencing, the trial court scored …
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 Burden Of Proof For Prior Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Judge.
Charles DeGeso appeals his convictions for two counts of trafficking in cocaine in violation of section 893.135, Florida Statutes (1995); passing a worthless check in violation of section 832.05(2), Florida Statutes (1995); and failure to appear in violation of section 843.15, Florida Statutes (1995). He raises nine issues on appeal. We see no basis for reversing the convictions, and they are affirmed without discussion. We reverse the sentences, however, and remand for resentencing in accordance with this opinion.
DeGeso argues that the trial court erred by scoring four of the points for prior record because the offenses were committed more than ten years prior and he had a clean record for the intervening ten-year period. The State argued below that the release dates fell within the previous ten years, but the State did not introduce any documentary evidence to support its argument. On appeal, the State contends that this claim was abandoned, but this contention is not supported by the record. “When the defense challenges prior convictions and the accuracy of the score-sheet, the state has the burden of producing competent evidence of the disputed conviction.” Watson v. State, 591 So. 2d 951, 953 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Here, the State offered no evidence, only argument by the prosecutor. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing with a new scoresheet. The trial court must use a 1994 scoresheet because, as the State concedes, DeGeso’s offense dates fall within Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000) (holding 1995 sentencing guidelines unconstitutional).
Finally, DeGeso argues that the trial court erred by denying credit for time served in the New Jersey prison system while he was being held on the Florida detainer. A trial judge has “inherent discretionary authority to award credit for time served in other jurisdictions while awaiting transfer to Florida.” Kronz v. State, 462 So. 2d 450, 451 (Fla.1985). In exercising this discretion, a trial court should consider whether the defendant was being held “solely because of the Florida offense for which he or she is being sentenced.” 462 So. 2d at 451. Because the record reveals the trial court did not understand that it had this discretion, we direct that the matter be addressed on remand.
Convictions affirmed; sentences reversed; remanded for resentencing.
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lyons v. State, 823 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…on appellant’s 3.800(b) motion. Although the state argued below that the initial burden of proof shifts to the appellant if there is no objection at sentencing, there was no case law produced to support that position. See generally DeGeso v. State, 771 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (at sentencing, when the defendant challenges prior convictions and the accuracy of the scoresheet, the state has the burden of producing competent evidence of the disputed conviction). It cannot be said with certainty that with a…
-
McRAE v. State, 820 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…utside the State of Florida. A trial court has discretionary authority to award credit for the time a defendant was incarcerated outside the state while awaiting transfer to Florida. Kronz v. State, 462 So. 2d 450, 451 (Fla.1985); DeGeso v. State, 771 So. 2d 1264, 1265 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). When deciding whether to award credit, “a trial court should consider whether the defendant was being held ‘solely because of the Florida offense for which he or she is being sentenced.’ ” DeGeso, 771 So. 2d at 1265 (quotin…
-
State v. Leeroy Wayne Barfield, 995 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…onvictions such as certified copies of convictions and/or original court records); Lyons v. State, 823 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (recognizing that the state has the burden of producing competent evidence of a prior conviction); DeGeso v. State, 771 So. 2d 1264, 1265 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (recognizing that “the state has the burden of producing competent evidence of the disputed conviction” and the prior conviction must be proven by evidence, not just argument by the prosecutor). The same burden of proof appl…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Kronz v. State, 462 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1985)
- Watson v. State, 591 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)