LAWRENCE BURNS, 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.
Burns appeals from the summary denial of his motion to correct sentencing, arguing that the trial court applied an unconstitutional 1995 sentencing guideline scoresheet rather than the 1994 scoresheet required by Heggs v. State. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reverses and remands for the trial court to either refute Burns' claim with conclusive records or resentence him under the proper 1994 guidelines.
The court reverses the summary denial of Burns' motion to correct sentencing. The trial court on remand must either attach records conclusively refuting Burns' claim that the wrong scoresheet was used, or alternatively, resentence Burns in accordance with the Heggs decision and the proper 1994 guidelines.
[1] A defendant is entitled to resentencing under the 1994 sentencing guidelines if sentenced under the unconstitutional 1995 guidelines and the sentence could not have been…
[2] Defendants challenging a sentence imposed under the 1995 sentencing guidelines have standing if the relevant offense occurred on or after October 1, 1995, and before May…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Burns appeals from a summary denial of his Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct sentencing. We reverse.”
Establishes the core issue and the court's disposition.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1998, Burns pleaded no contest to lewd and lascivious assault upon a child. He was initially sentenced to five years of sex offender probation, but…
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 Unconstitutional Application Of Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
EVANDER, J.
Burns appeals from a summary denial of his Rule 3.800(a)1 motion to correct sentencing. We reverse.
In 1998, Burns pled no contest to lewd and lascivious assault upon a child for an incident which allegedly occurred on November 1, 1996. As a result of this plea, Burns was sentenced to five years of sex offender probation.
Burns subsequently violated his probation and was sentenced in March, 2000, to fifty-one weeks incarceration followed by another five years of sex offender probation.
In May, 2002, Burns again violated his probation. He was arrested for the VOP on January 10, 2007. The following month, Burns. admitted the violation and was sentenced to ninety months incarceration.
Shortly thereafter, Burns filed his motion to correct sentence, alleging that the trial court utilized the wrong scoresheet at the 2007 sentencing. Specifically, Burns alleged that the trial court utilized a 1995 sentencing guideline scoresheet — rather than a 1994 scoresheet, as required by Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000).2 Burns argues, and the State appears to agree, that under the 1994 scoresheet, the maximum allowable sentence would be 82.5 months. On remand, the trial court must either attach records conclusively refuting Burns’ claim, or alternatively, resentence Burns in accordance with Heggs.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PALMER, C.J. and MONACO, J., concur. . Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a).
. In Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000), the Florida Supreme Court held that Chapter 95-184, Laws of Florida, containing, inter alia, the 1995 sentencing guidelines, was unconstitutional because it violated the Florida Constitution’s single-subject rule. Accordingly, where a defendant was sentenced under the unconstitutional 1995 guidelines and his sentence could not be imposed under the 1994 guidelines without a departure, a defendant would be entitled to resentencing under the 1994 guidelines. In Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla.2000), the Supreme Court elaborated on the window period for defendants to raise such a claim under Heggs. There, the Supreme Court stated:
[Piersons ... who are challenging a sentence imposed under the sentencing guidelines as amended by chapter 95-184 have standing to do so if the relevant criminal offense or offenses occurred on or after October 1, 1995, and before May 24, 1997.
Id. at 928.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Xzavier Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2000)