ANTHONY SHOVE, 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 reversed the trial court's summary denial of appellant's rule 3.800(a) motion challenging his sentence as calculated using an incorrect scoresheet, requiring the trial court on remand to either attach record portions conclusively refuting the claim or resentence appellant using the correct scoresheet.
A sentence imposed using an improper scoresheet that could not have been imposed using the proper scoresheet is illegal under rule 3.800(a), and summary denial of such a motion is improper without attaching record portions that conclusively refute the claim.
[1] A sentence imposed using an improper scoresheet that could not have been imposed using the proper scoresheet constitutes an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Crimina…
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 intelligenceAppellant Shove sought postconviction relief alleging his sentence was calculated using an incorrect scoresheet and that the correct scoresheet would …
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 Rule 3.850 Motion For Post-Conviction Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of the trial court’s summary denial of his motions seeking postconviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) and 3.850. We affirm without discussion the denial of appellant’s rule 3.850 motion. However, appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion alleged that his sentence was calculated using an incorrect scoresheet and that the sentence imposed could not have been imposed pursuant to the correct scoresheet, and the trial court failed to attach to its order portions of the record that conclusively refute that claim. See Brooks v. State, 969 So. 2d 238 (Fla.2007) (indicating that a sentence that was imposed using an improper scoresheet, and that could not have been imposed using the proper scoresheet, is illegal for purposes of rule 3.800(a)).
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion. On remand, should the trial court again conclude that appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion lacks merit, it shall attach to its order such portions of the record as conclusively refute that claim; otherwise, it shall resentence appellant using the correct scoresheet. We affirm the summary denial of appellant’s rule 3.850 motion.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.
WEBSTER, BENTON, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.