Calvin Essix v. the State of Florida
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed June 25, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1404 Lower Tribunal No. F17-2927 ________________
Calvin Essix, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ramiro C. Areces, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jennifer Thornton, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Yolande M. Samerson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 775.084(4)(h), Fla. Stat. (“A sentence imposed under
this section [providing enhanced penalties for Habitual Violent Felony
Offenders] is not subject to s. 921.002 [establishing Criminal Punishment
Code scoresheets].”); Garcia v. State, 308 So. 3d 1031, 1033 (Fla. 4th DCA
2020) (“[T]the defendant was sentenced pursuant to the habitual felony
offender statute and not the Criminal Punishment Code, making his
sentencing guidelines scoresheet legally irrelevant and any miscalculations
on it harmless as a matter of law.”) (internal citations omitted); Horn v. State,
775 So. 2d 1007, 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (“[W]e need not address
[defendant’s] claim [that there was an incorrect calculation in his sentencing
guidelines scoresheet] because defendant was sentenced as a habitual
offender and the guidelines scoresheet is irrelevant.”); see also McKnight v.
State, 773 So. 2d 577, 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (stating that habitual offender
sentences “are not subject to the sentencing guidelines”).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Calvin Essix v. the State of Florida (Calvin Essix v. the State of Florida) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.