ANGELA SIMMONS, 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 affirmed the denial of ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to appeal, but reversed the summary denial of claims regarding scoresheet errors and remanded for appellant to amend her motion with specific factual allegations about which offenses were improperly scored.
A trial court's summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion challenging scoresheet errors must be reversed when the motion is too vague to permit meaningful review, even if the errors might be deemed de minimis.
[1] A trial court's summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion alleging scoresheet errors must be reversed when the motion fails to specify which offenses were improperly scored a…
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 intelligenceAngela Simmons filed a post-conviction motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 challenging her sentences in two cases and alleging ineff…
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 Sentencing Scoresheet Error cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant Angela Simmons appeals a trial court order summarily denying her motion for post conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, challenging her sentences in two cases and alleging a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
We affirm the trial court’s denial of her claim of failure of counsel to file an appeal on her behalf, without prejudice to her right to seek any relief which is not now time barred and which otherwise is available to her under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c). We disagree with the trial court’s conclusion that the score-sheet error was necessarily de minimis in this case, given appellant’s claims that her scoresheet, even as it may have been revised or corrected, contained multiple assessments for offenses for which she was not convicted.
*824Nonetheless, appellant’s motion was too vague as to which offenses were improperly scored, and how a corrected scoresheet would have differed. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s claims relating to scoresheet error and ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to correct such error before sentencing, and remand to the trial court to allow appellant an opportunity to amend her motion to state legally sufficient claims on those grounds, specifying which points were added erroneously on which charges for which she was not convicted, and setting forth what convictions should have been listed and assessed. Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754 (Fla.2007).
Affirmed in Part, Reversed and Remanded in Part.
WARNER, FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jerry v. State, 225 So. 3d 246 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)…so much as it was a request for the court to wade through the entire' records of multiple cases searching for anything that might benefit Defendant. Although they .arise from different circumstances, we adopt here the reasoning of Simmons v. State, 42 So. 3d 823 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), and Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 2007). In those cases, this Court and the Florida Supreme Court held that the appropriate disposition of a vague motion is to allow for a more precise motion to be made. Simmons, 42 So. 3…
Authorities Cited
- Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 2007)