Goings v. State

990 So. 2d 1228, 2008 WL 4298538
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 23, 2008
Docket1D08-0638
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 990 So. 2d 1228 (Goings 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
Goings v. State, 990 So. 2d 1228, 2008 WL 4298538 (Fla. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

990 So.2d 1228 (2008)

Glenn Jeffery GOINGS, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D08-0638.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

September 23, 2008.

Glenn Jeffery Goings, pro se, Appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Natalie D. Kirk, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The appellant claims his sentencing scoresheet improperly assessed eighteen points for use of a firearm, when his sentence was already enhanced to include a three-year minimum mandatory for use of a firearm. Section 921.0014(1), Florida Statutes (1995) provides, in pertinent part, "If the offender is convicted of committing or attempting to commit any felony other than those enumerated in s. 775.087(2) while having in his possession: a firearm as defined in s. 790.001(6), an additional 18 sentence points are assessed." Among the enumerated felonies in section 775.087(2)(a), is the offense of "murder."

In the instant case, the appellant was convicted of second-degree murder. Therefore, the trial court erred in imposing the firearm points. See Bush v. State, 687 So.2d 312, 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). The state concedes that 18 points were erroneously assessed. Furthermore, a corrected scoresheet only allows up to 21.6 years' imprisonment. Because the appellant's 23.5-year sentence could not have been imposed absent a departure, the appellant is entitled to relief. See Brooks v. State, 969 So.2d 238, 238 (Fla.2007). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's summary denial of the appellant's motion to correct an illegal sentence. On remand, should the trial court again determine that the appellant is not entitled to relief, it shall attach to its order those portions of the record conclusively demonstrating that; otherwise, it shall grant the motion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED, with directions.

BROWNING, C.J., and WOLF, J., concur; WEBSTER, J., concurs in result only.

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

Related

Gautreaux v. State
95 So. 3d 1012 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Holton v. State
51 So. 3d 1164 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
990 So. 2d 1228, 2008 WL 4298538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goings-v-state-fladistctapp-2008.