Braswell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Braswell v. State

171 So. 3d 199, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 11650, 2015 WL 4622746

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 4, 2015

DocketNo. 1D14-809

StatusPublished

This text of 171 So. 3d 199 (Braswell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Braswell v. State, 171 So. 3d 199, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 11650, 2015 WL 4622746 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of false imprisonment and felony battery after an incident with his ex-girlfriend that took place in July 2012. He was designated a habitual felony offender (HFO) on both counts and sentenced to 90.375 months in prison followed by 5 years probation. The trial court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively.

Appellant raises three issues in this direct appeal. First, he argues that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding certain evidence at trial. Second, he contends that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive HFO sentences. Third, he argues that the Criminal Punishment Code (CPC) scoresheet and order of probation contain scrivener’s errors in that they incorrectly indicate that he entered a plea in this case.

We affirm the first issue without comment. As to the second issue, we agree with Appellant. The trial court is prohibited from imposing consecutive HFO sentences for offenses that were committed during a single criminal episode. See Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521, 524-25 (Fla.1994). Accordingly, although we affirm Appellant’s convictions, we reverse his sentences and remand for re-sentencing in accordance with the restrictions on enhanced sentencing. On remand, the trial court should correct the CPC scoresheet and order of probation to reflect that Appellant was found guilty by a jury verdict. See Murray v. State, 164 So.3d 1251 (Fla. 1st DCA2015).

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions.

WOLF and BILBREY, JJ., and HULSLANDER, VICTOR L., Associate Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of false imprisonment and felony battery after an incident with his ex-girlfriend that took place in July 2012. He was designated a habitual felony offender (HFO) on both counts and sentenced to 90.375 months in prison followed by 5 years probation. The trial court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively.

Appellant raises three issues in this direct appeal. First, he argues that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding certain evidence at trial. Second, he contends that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive HFO sentences. Third, he argues that the Criminal Punishment Code (CPC) scoresheet and order of probation contain scrivener’s errors in that they incorrectly indicate that he entered a plea in this case.

We affirm the first issue without comment. As to the second issue, we agree with Appellant. The trial court is prohibited from imposing consecutive HFO sentences for offenses that were committed during a single criminal episode. See Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521, 524-25 (Fla.1994). Accordingly, although we affirm Appellant’s convictions, we reverse his sentences and remand for re-sentencing in accordance with the restrictions on enhanced sentencing. On remand, the trial court should correct the CPC scoresheet and order of probation to reflect that Appellant was found guilty by a jury verdict. See Murray v. State, 164 So.3d 1251 (Fla. 1st DCA2015).

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions.

WOLF and BILBREY, JJ., and HULSLANDER, VICTOR L., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 So. 3d 199, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 11650, 2015 WL 4622746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/braswell-v-state-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack