ROBERT THOMAS, 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 appellant's motion to correct a scoresheet error, holding that a life sentence was authorized by the sentencing guidelines regardless of any scoresheet error, and that failure to file written reasons for departure does not constitute an illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a).
A scoresheet error does not require correction where the same sentence could have been imposed absent the error, and failure to file written reasons for a departure sentence does not constitute an illegal sentence challengeable under rule 3.800(a).
[1] A scoresheet error does not require correction under rule 3.800(a) where the same sentence could have been imposed absent the scoresheet error.
[2] Failure to file written reasons for a departure from sentencing guidelines does not constitute an illegal sentence challengeable under rule 3.800(a).
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobert Thomas appealed the denial of his motion to correct a scoresheet error in his sentencing, claiming the entry of 'LIFE' as his maximum sentence …
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 Scoresheet Error cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm the denial of appellant’s motion to correct a scoresheet error. To the extent that appellant claims that the entry of “LIFE” as his maximum sentence on the scoresheet is an error, the same sentence of life could have been imposed absent the alleged error, because his total sentence points exceeded 363, which pursuant to section 921.0014(2), Florida Statutes (1998), authorizes a life sentence. See Brooks v. State, 969 So.2d 238, 243 (Fla.2007) (correction of scoresheet error not required where same sentence could have been imposed absent scoresheet error). To the extent he claims that the trial court departed from the sentencing guidelines without written reasons, he is not entitled to relief under rule 3.800(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Davis v. State, 661 So.2d 1193 (Fla.1995) (failure to file written findings for a departure sentence does not constitute an illegal sentence that can be challenged under rule 3.800(a)), receded from on other grounds by Mack v. State, 823 So.2d 746, 748-49 (Fla.2002); see also Wright v. State, 911 *437So.2d 81, 83-84 (Fla.2005) (relying on Davis ’ holding that failure to file written reasons for departure does not make sentence illegal and acknowledging that Davis was receded from on other grounds in Mack).
Affirmed.
STEVENSON and CIKLIN, JJ„ concur.
WARNER, J., concurs specially.
concurring specially.
I agree with the majority. I would add, however, that much of appellant’s argument that his life sentence was illegal is based upon Franco v. State, 777 So.2d 1138, 1140-42 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), which held that a life sentence imposed where total sentencing points exceed 363, as permitted under section 921.0014(2), is a departure sentence which must be supported with written reasons. I think Franco was wrongly decided. All other courts which have reviewed this statute also disagree with Franco. See, e.g., Kalapp v. State, 729 So.2d 987, 990 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Cash v. State, 779 So.2d 425, 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Byrd v. State, 841 So.2d 502, 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). Receding from Franco, however, is not essential to the result in this case.
WARNER, J.,
concurring specially.
I agree with the majority. I would add, however, that much of appellant’s argument that his life sentence was illegal is based upon Franco v. State, 777 So. 2d 1138, 1140-42 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), which held that a life sentence imposed where total sentencing points exceed 363, as permitted under section 921.0014(2), is a departure sentence which must be supported with written reasons. I think Franco was wrongly decided. All other courts which have reviewed this statute also disagree with Franco. See, e.g., Kalapp v. State, 729 So. 2d 987, 990 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Cash v. State, 779 So. 2d 425, 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Byrd v. State, 841 So. 2d 502, 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). Receding from Franco, however, is not essential to the result in this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Davis v. State, 661 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 1995)
- Brooks v. State, 969 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 2007)
- Wright v. State, 911 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 2005)
- Mack v. State, 823 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 2002)
- Franco v. State, 777 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Kalapp v. State, 729 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Cash v. State, 779 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Shamond Byrd v. State, 841 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)