Frost v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Frost v. State

695 So. 2d 914, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7180, 1997 WL 345987

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 25, 1997

DocketNo. 96-106

StatusPublished

This text of 695 So. 2d 914 (Frost 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

Frost v. State, 695 So. 2d 914, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7180, 1997 WL 345987 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Marcille Robert Frost appeals a judgment of convictions and sentences. Although we find no error as to defendant’s convictions, we correct the judgment to show that the conviction for attempted second degree murder with a firearm is a first degree felony. See Newbold, v. State, 667 So.2d 996 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). We also vacate defendant’s sentence as it is based on an incorrect score-sheet: the scoresheet improperly reflects the level of the primary offense at conviction and improperly imposes a law enforcement protection multiplier. In recalculating the scoresheet to resentenee defendant, the offense level must be redetermined and the multiplier may not be applied where, as here, defendant did not commit any of the enumerated violations set forth in section 921.0014, Florida Statutes (1995). Accordingly, we affirm defendant’s convictions, as modified, vacate his sentence, and remand for resentenc-ing.

Convictions affirmed, as modified; sentence vacated; and cause remanded for re-sentencing.

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

PER CURIAM.

Marcille Robert Frost appeals a judgment of convictions and sentences. Although we find no error as to defendant’s convictions, we correct the judgment to show that the conviction for attempted second degree murder with a firearm is a first degree felony. See Newbold, v. State, 667 So.2d 996 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). We also vacate defendant’s sentence as it is based on an incorrect score-sheet: the scoresheet improperly reflects the level of the primary offense at conviction and improperly imposes a law enforcement protection multiplier. In recalculating the scoresheet to resentenee defendant, the offense level must be redetermined and the multiplier may not be applied where, as here, defendant did not commit any of the enumerated violations set forth in section 921.0014, Florida Statutes (1995). Accordingly, we affirm defendant’s convictions, as modified, vacate his sentence, and remand for resentenc-ing.

Convictions affirmed, as modified; sentence vacated; and cause remanded for re-sentencing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

695 So. 2d 914, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7180, 1997 WL 345987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frost-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack