Fairclough v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fairclough v. State

680 So. 2d 633, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10927, 1996 WL 590780

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 16, 1996·No. No. 95-3416·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to all issues except the issue of appellant’s conviction and sentence for armed home invasion robbery, which was contrary to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of judgment and sentence. See Tannihill v. State, 559 So.2d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). We therefore reverse appellant’s conviction and vacate his sentence as to count I, armed home invasion robbery. However, remand for resentencing is unnecessary as appellant’s sentencing guidelines scoresheet reflects that the armed home invasion robbery count was not scored in calculating his sentence as to the other counts. See Duncan v. State, 503 So.2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

WARNER, PARIENTE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to all issues except the issue of appellant’s conviction and sentence for armed home invasion robbery, which was contrary to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of judgment and sentence. See Tannihill v. State, 559 So.2d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). We therefore reverse appellant’s conviction and vacate his sentence as to count I, armed home invasion robbery. However, remand for resentencing is unnecessary as appellant’s sentencing guidelines scoresheet reflects that the armed home invasion robbery count was not scored in calculating his sentence as to the other counts. See Duncan v. State, 503 So.2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

WARNER, PARIENTE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Fairclough v. State, 680 So. 2d 633, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10927, 1996 WL 590780 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

680 So. 2d 633 (Fairclough v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related