JUSTIN MICHAEL ADAMS, 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.
In this direct appeal of a criminal sentence, the Florida First District Court of Appeal identified potential sentencing errors and struck the defendant's Anders brief to allow him to file a motion in the trial court challenging the sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). The court found that the defendant's 24-month prison sentence appeared unsupported by the sentencing scoresheet and lacked required written findings.
The court found apparent sentencing error: the 24-month prison sentence was not supported by the 14.8-point scoresheet, and the trial court made no written findings justifying an upward departure from the mandatory nonstate prison sanction required by section 775.082(10), Florida Statutes. The court also found that the Order of Revocation must be corrected to match the trial court's oral pronouncement.
[1] A court must sentence a defendant to a nonstate prison sanction for a third-degree felony committed after July 1, 2009, if the total sentencing points are 22 or fewer, un…
[2] A trial court cannot impose a state prison sentence for a third-degree felony when the sentencing score sheet indicates 22 or fewer points without making written findings…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“If a defendant is sentenced for an offense committed on or after July 1, 2009, which is a third degree felony but not a forcible felony as defined in s. 776.08, and excluding any third degree felony violation under chapter 810, and if the total sentence points pursuant to s. 921.0024 are 22 points or fewer, the court must sentence the offender to a nonstate prison sanction.”
Establishes the mandatory sentencing requirement under section 775.082(10) that the trial court allegedly violated.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Adams was sentenced to 24 months in state prison. The sentencing scoresheet indicated 14.8 total sentencing points. The case involved a thir…
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 Nonstate Prison Sanction cases and more on FLexlaw
ORDER STRIKING ANDERS BRIEF
Appellant filed an initial brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), which requires that this court independently “examine the' record to the extent necessary to discover any errors apparent on- the face of the record.” State v. Causey, 503 So.2d 321, 322 (Fla.1987). Upon review by the court, it appears that a-sentencing error may exist. The scoresheet completed for sentencing and included in the record indicates Appellant' was assigned 14.8 total sentencing points. Under section 775.082(10), Florida Statutes:
If a defendant is sentenced for an offense committed on or after Julyl, 2009, which is a third degree felony but not a forcible felony' as defined in s. 776.08, and excluding any third degree felony violation under chapter 810, and if the total séntence points pursuant to s. 921.0024 are 22 points or fewer, the court must sentence the offender to a nonstate prison sanction. However, if the court makes written findings that a nonstate prison sanction could present' a danger to the public, the court may sentence the offender to a state correctional facility pursuant to this section.
Here, Appellant was sentenced to twenty-four (24) months in state prison. This sentence is not supported by the score-sheet of 14.8 total sentencing points. Furthermore, the trial court made no written findings, supported by the record, to justify an upward departure from the presumptive mandatory sentencing of section *642775.082(10), Fla. Stat. Jones v. State, 771 So.3d 173, 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
In addition, the scoresheet at issue refers to docket # 15-5140, which is the docket number for the new law violation, burglary of a dwelling. The correct case number under which Appellant was sentenced and which is the basis for this appeal is docket # 15-0664, the original charge for credit card fraud. The score-sheet, despite the incorrect docket number listing, does refer to the correct primary offense.
The Order of Revocation also contains an error. The oral pronouncement of the trial court declared violations of “Conditions 2, 5 and 8”. However, the Order of Revocation documents violations of “Conditions 2, 3 and 8”. The Order should be corrected to comport with the oral pronouncement made by the trial court.
Accordingly, on the court’s own motion and pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(g)(2)(B), the initial brief filed May 5, 2016, is stricken in order to permit the filing of a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). Counsel for appellant shall file the motion with the lower tribunal within twenty days of the date of this order, and the lower tribunal is directed to resolve the motion in accordance with rule 3.800(b)(2)(B). The clerk of the lower tribunal shall thereafter transmit a supplemental record on appeal pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(f)(6), and counsel for appellant shall file an amended initial brief within twenty days following transmittal of the supplemental record.
BILBREY, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Clark v. State, 223 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…nsmit a supplemental record on appeal pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(f)(6), and counsel for Appellant shall file an amended initial brief within twenty days following transmittal of the supplemental record. See Adams v. State, 197 So. 3d 641, 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). WOLF and ROWE, JJ., and GRIFFIS III, STANLEY H., ASSOCIATE JUDGE, CONCUR.…
-
Norris Hubbard, JR. v. State, 248 So. 3d 177 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)…So. 3d 162, 163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (striking Anders brief to allow appellate counsel to file motion with the trial court under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) addressing sentencing error uncovered by appellate court); Adams v. State, 197 So. 3d 641, 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) ("[O]n the court's own motion and pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(g)(2)(B), the [Anders] brief . . . is stricken in order to permit the filing of a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedu…
-
Clark v. State, 238 So. 3d 750 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)…t a supplemental record on appeal pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(f)(6), and counsel for Appellant shall file an amended initial brief within twenty days following transmittal of the supplemental record. See Adams v. State, 197 So. 3d 641, 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). WOLF and ROWE, JJ., and GRIFFIS III, STANLEY H., ASSOCIATE JUDGE, CONCUR.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- State v. Causey, 503 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1987)
- Jones v. State, 41 So. 3d 356 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)