Hallback v. State

479 So. 2d 865, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 13
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 19, 1985
Docket85-257
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 479 So. 2d 865 (Hallback 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
Hallback v. State, 479 So. 2d 865, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 13 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

479 So.2d 865 (1985)

Calvin HALLBACK, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 85-257.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

December 19, 1985.

Ricky R. Damerville, Orlando, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and W. Brian Bayly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

COBB, Chief Judge.

Hallback appeals his sentence of seven-and-a-half years' incarceration resulting from his guilty plea to six counts of dealing in stolen property, one count of delivery of cocaine and violation of probation. His score sheet gave a recommended guideline sentence of four-and-a-half to five-and-a-half years' incarceration, which was in the fifth cell. Included in the score sheet was the burglary for which he was on probation. This was scored as prior record. The trial court departed from the recommended sentence and sentenced Hallback to five years on each of the first seven offenses, to run concurrently, and thirty months to run consecutively for the burglary. This resulted in a sentence of seven-and-a-half years, which was in the eighth cell.

Initially, this case must be remanded under State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 1985), as the basis for departure was not in writing. On remand, it should be noted by the trial court that it was improper to score the burglary as prior record. Rather, it should have been scored as an additional offense at conviction.[1]See Bradley v. State, 480 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), corrected opinion on rehearing, 10 FLW 2612 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 22, 1985). This will decrease the recommended sentence to the fourth cell. The lower court may wish to take advantage of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(14), which provides for an increase of one cell for a probation violation without requiring a reason for departure.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

UPCHURCH and SHARP, JJ., concur.

NOTES

[1] Rule 3.701(d)(4) reads as follows:

Additional offenses at conviction: All other offenses for which the offender is convicted and which are pending before the court shall be scored as additional offenses based upon their degree and the number of counts of each. (Emphasis added.)

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

Related

Ludeman v. State
595 So. 2d 978 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Fletcher v. State
593 So. 2d 514 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Peterson v. State
523 So. 2d 168 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Rojas v. State
506 So. 2d 1158 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Jolly v. State
502 So. 2d 1324 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
State v. Salsberry
487 So. 2d 402 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
479 So. 2d 865, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hallback-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.