DONALD BAKER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 a trial court must require corroborating evidence when a defendant disputes prior convictions based solely on hearsay.
Defendant moved for resentencing due to alleged errors in his guideline scoresheet, which the State conceded was incorrect. Defense counsel refused to…
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 Guidelines Scoresheet cases and more on FLexlaw
CORTEÑAS, J.
Donald Baker (“Defendant”) admitted to violating the terms of his probation and was sentenced to 8.2 years in prison, the minimum sentence recommended by the guideline scoresheet. Defendant timely moved for resentencing based on alleged errors in the guideline scoresheet, which the State conceded was incorrect. During the resentencing hearing, defense counsel refused to stipulate to the new scoresheet because it included convictions that were based solely on a hearsay printout. Nevertheless, the trial court accepted the newly calculated scoresheet and denied the Motion to Resentence.
Where a defendant disputes prior convictions that are based only on hearsay evidence, the court must require the State to produce corroborating evidence. See Eutsey v. State, 383 So. 2d 219, 225 (Fla. 1980); Blanton v. State, 546 So. 2d 1181, 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398, 399 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In the instant case, following defense counsel’s refusal to stipulate to the hearsay-based scoresheet, the trial court was required to request from the State competent corroborating evidence. It erred in not doing so.
On remand, the State should have an opportunity to prove Defendant’s prior convictions by corroborating, non-hearsay evidence. See Williams v. State, 545 So. 2d 302, 303-04 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Davis, 133 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…f hearsay statements contained in a presentence report (and those hearsay statements are material to the court’s required findings for an enhanced sentence), the State must produce evidence to corroborate those hearsay statements. In Baker v. State, 997 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), this Court, relying upon Eutsey, held that where a defendant at sentencing disputes the existence of prior convictions which are attributed to him based only on a hearsay document, the State must provide corroborating, non-hearsa…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Fredford James Eutsey v. State, 383 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1980)
- Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- State v. Zaiser, 546 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Blanton v. State, 546 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Williams v. State, 545 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)