Freeman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Freeman v. State

693 So. 2d 138, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5167, 1997 WL 249146

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 14, 1997

DocketNo. 95-4425

StatusPublished

This text of 693 So. 2d 138 (Freeman 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

Freeman v. State, 693 So. 2d 138, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5167, 1997 WL 249146 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Dwight Freeman appeals his conviction and sentence for armed robbery. We affirm his conviction, but remand for an evidentiary hearing as to the point raised alleging a sentencing error.

Appellant contends it was error to score as a “prior” conviction a grand theft auto case, as that crime was not committed until after the offense he now appeals. If appellant is correct in this assertion, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.702(8) would preclude scoring the grand theft auto as a prior conviction. The problem is that this claim was not brought to the attention of the sentencing judge, so a record determination could be made of Freeman’s claim.

Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to determine whether the grand theft auto was committed before or after this armed robbery, and to score and sentence appellant accordingly.

POLEN, PARIENTE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Dwight Freeman appeals his conviction and sentence for armed robbery. We affirm his conviction, but remand for an evidentiary hearing as to the point raised alleging a sentencing error.

Appellant contends it was error to score as a “prior” conviction a grand theft auto case, as that crime was not committed until after the offense he now appeals. If appellant is correct in this assertion, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.702(8) would preclude scoring the grand theft auto as a prior conviction. The problem is that this claim was not brought to the attention of the sentencing judge, so a record determination could be made of Freeman’s claim.

Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to determine whether the grand theft auto was committed before or after this armed robbery, and to score and sentence appellant accordingly.

POLEN, PARIENTE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

693 So. 2d 138, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5167, 1997 WL 249146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freeman-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.