JASON MIKEL SPAULDING, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed a grand theft conviction and sentence despite scoresheet errors, finding them harmless because the trial court would have imposed the same sentence regardless, but remanded for entry of a corrected scoresheet.
Scoresheet errors in a sentencing calculation are harmless when the record conclusively demonstrates the trial court would have imposed the same sentence even with a correct scoresheet.
[1] Scoresheet errors in sentencing are harmless error when the record conclusively shows the trial court would have imposed the same sentence with a correct scoresheet, requ…
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to unlock all legal intelligenceSpaulding was convicted of grand theft of between $300 and $5,000 and his probation was revoked. During the appeal, he filed a motion alleging scoresh…
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
Jason Mikel Spaulding challenges his judgment and sentence for grand theft of between $300 and' $5000 entered after the reVocation of the probation he was serving on the charge. While this appeal was pending, Spaulding filed a Florida Rulé' of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion alleging several scoresheet errors. We agree with the trial court that any scoresheet errors1 were harmless due to the fact that the record conclusively shows that the.trial court would have imposed' the samé sentence upon revocation of probation had the court had the benefit of a correct score-sheet. See Brooks v. State, 969 So.2d 238, 241 (Fla. 2007). Accordingly we affirm Spaulding’s judgment and sentence.
However, because the trial court definitely found error—albeit harmless error-—in the inclusion of -nineteen points for a prior Illinois offense and six community - sanction points, we remand for entry of a' corrected scoresheet omitting those twenty-five points. See State v. Anderson, 905 So.2d 111, 114 (Fla. 2005) (“Courts have developed a harmless error analysis to determine whether a scoresheet error must be merely corrected (harmless) or whether the error warrants both correction and resentencing (harmful).” (emphasis added)).
Affirmed; remanded.
KHOUZAM and BADALAMENTI, JJ„ Concur.- .
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Brooks v. State, 969 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 2007)
- State v. Anderson, 905 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2005)