GREGORY CARTER, 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 victim injury points were improperly scored for penetration and that sentences imposed exceeded the statutory maximum for sexual battery.
[1] Victim injury points for sexual battery may not be assessed for penetration when the charging instrument alleges only sexual contact.
[2] A court must remand for a factual determination of the basis for scoring victim injury points when the charging instrument is ambiguous regarding the nature of the sexual…
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 intelligenceAppellant was convicted of sexual battery and received concurrent sentences. The State conceded that victim injury points were improperly scored for p…
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 Victim Injury Points cases and more on FLexlaw
TORPY, J.
In this sexual battery case, we are asked to review the legality of Appellant’s concurrent sentences of 26 years, followed by ten years probation, on each , of the two sexual battery counts.
The first sentencing issue relates to the propriety of scoring victim injury points for penetration (rather than sexual contact) on count two, which was based on the allegation that Appellant committed sexual battery “by placing his penis in union with” the vagina of the victim. The State concedes that penetration points are not appropriate under the facts as alleged in the information. In reliance on West v. State, 823 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), it urges, however, that because the plea transcript is not part of the record, we should remand this cause to the trial court to determine if there is a basis in fact to support the assessment of penetration points. We disagree and think West is distinguishable.
In West, the information alleged that the unlawful act had been committed by “penetration and/or union” with the victim’s vagina. Here, unlike West, only one theory is alleged — “union with,” and penetration points may not be assessed even if penetration did in fact occur. Whalen v. State, 895 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). On remand, therefore, the court shall correct the scoresheet on count two to reflect 40 points for sexual contact, instead of 80 points for penetration.
The second issue — whether the court improperly imposed sentences in excess of the statutory maximum on the sexual battery counts — also requires reversal as the State properly concedes. Under the plain language of the statutory scheme at issue here, the trial judge could impose the statutory maximum of 30 years, or a life sentence, but not a term sentence in excess of 30 years. Willis v. State, 785 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
Accordingly, Appellant’s sentences on counts one and two are reversed, and this cause is remanded for correction of the scoresheet and resentencing. Id.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PLEUS, C.J., and MONACO, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cliatt v. State, 970 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…e trial court did not exercise its discretion to impose life imprisonment, it could not impose a sentence in which the total of the incareerative term and the probationary term exceeded the maximum sentence for a particular offense. Carter v. State, 920 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). On remand, the trial court may restructure its sentence to try to achieve its original sentencing goal; provided, that absent an intervening event which would justify a greater sentence, the new sentence shall [*903] not be a m…
-
Renaldo Champagne v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Whalen v. State, 895 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Willis v. State, 785 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- West v. State, 823 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)