In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.992

CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMarch 24, 2022
DocketSC21-891
StatusPublished

This text of In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.992 (In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.992) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.992, (Fla. 2022).

Opinion

Supreme Court of Florida ____________

No. SC21-891 ____________

IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.992.

March 24, 2022

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the Court for consideration of proposed

amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.992. We have

jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. The Criminal Court

Steering Committee (CCSC) filed a report proposing amendments to

rule 3.992 (Criminal Punishment Code Scoresheets). The CCSC’s

report was in response to a referral from the Court to propose

amendments to the rule in accordance with the Court’s recent

decision in State v. Gabriel, 314 So. 3d 1243, 1252 (Fla. 2021)

(concluding that “under section 921.0024(2), the LPS [lowest

permissible sentence] is an individual minimum sentence where

there are multiple convictions subject to sentencing on a single

scoresheet”). The CCSC and the Court previously published the proposal for comment. The CCSC submitted an amended report,

which was published by the Court and received one comment.

Having considered the amended proposal, the comment, and

the Committee’s response, the Court hereby amends rule 3.992

with additional modifications to the amended proposal. Specifically,

under the sentence computation heading, in the third box,

additional language is added to explain that the lowest permissible

sentence is imposed if it is higher than the statutory maximum for

an individual felony offense pursuant to Gabriel, and a detailed

calculation is added to explain how to total the maximum sentence

for each felony offense before the court for sentencing.

The CCSC’s amended proposal does not fully resolve the

concerns identified by this Court in Gabriel. In Gabriel, on the

single line titled “maximum sentence in years,” the trial judge

entered “25 years,” the collective statutory maximum for the three

offenses before the court for sentencing. 314 So. 3d at 1251 n.6.

As noted by this Court in Gabriel, this single line suggested one

collective maximum sentence when there were multiple convictions

subject to sentencing. Further, the language in the third box

stating that “[t]he maximum sentence is up to the statutory

-2- maximum for the primary and any additional offenses as provided

in s. 775.082, F.S., unless the lowest permissible sentence (LPS)

under the Code exceeds the statutory maximum” created ambiguity

regarding the trial court’s individual consideration of each offense’s

statutory maximum sentence for purposes of determining whether

it was exceeded by the LPS. The CCSC’s response suggests that the

purpose of the single line titled “maximum sentence in years” in the

third box under the sentence computation heading is to assist the

trial court in accurately advising a defendant of the maximum

prison exposure prior to entering a plea. We believe that the

amendments reflected in appendix A to this opinion clarify the

calculation for determining a defendant’s total maximum sentence

when there are multiple offenses before the court for sentencing.

For purposes of illustrating its use, we applied the amendments to

rule 3.992 to Gabriel’s case in appendix B to this opinion.

Accordingly, we amend Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure

3.992 as reflected in appendix A to this opinion. New language is

indicated by underscoring; deletions are indicated by struck-

through type. The amendments to the rule shall become effective

immediately. Because the amendments were significantly altered

-3- from the version that was previously published for comment,

interested persons shall have seventy-five days from the date of this

opinion in which to file comments with the Court. 1

It is so ordered.

CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LABARGA, LAWSON, MUÑIZ, COURIEL, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.

THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS.

Original Proceeding – Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure

1. All comments must be filed with the Court on or before June 7, 2022, with a certificate of service verifying that a copy has been served on the Committee Chair, Honorable Debra J. Riva, Twelfth Judicial Circuit, P.O. Box 48927, Sarasota, Florida 34230- 5927, driva@jud12.flcourts.org, and on the OSCA Staff Liaison to the Committee, Bart Schneider, 500 S. Duval Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399, schneidb@flcourts.org, as well as a separate request for oral argument if the person filing the comment wishes to participate in oral argument, which may be scheduled in this case. The Committee Chair has until June 28, 2022, to file a response to any comments filed with the Court. If filed by an attorney in good standing with The Florida Bar, the comment must be electronically filed via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal (Portal) in accordance with In re Electronic Filing in the Supreme Court of Florida via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC13-7 (Feb. 18, 2013). If filed by a nonlawyer or a lawyer not licensed to practice in Florida, the comment may be, but is not required to be, filed via the Portal. Any person unable to submit a comment electronically must mail or hand-deliver the originally signed comment to the Florida Supreme Court, Office of the Clerk, 500 South Duval Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1927; no additional copies are required or will be accepted.

-4- Judge Debra J. Riva, Chair, Criminal Court Steering Committee, Sarasota, Florida, and Bart Schneider, Staff Liaison, Office of the State Courts Administrator, Tallahassee, Florida,

for Petitioner

Hon. Carlos J. Martinez and Maria E. Lauredo on behalf of the Florida Public Defender Association, Inc., Miami, Florida,

Responding with comments

-5- APPENDIX A

Rule 3.992(a) Criminal Punishment Code Scoresheet �e Criminal Punishment Code Scoresheet Preparation Manual is available at: http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/sen_cpcm/index.html 1. DATE OF SENTENCE 2. PREPARER’S NAME 3. COUNTY 4. SENTENCING JUDGE

5. NAME (LAST, FIRST, MI.I.) 6. DOB 8. RACE 10. PRIMARY OFF. DATE 12.

B W OTHER PLEA  7. DC # 9. GENDER 11. PRIMARY DOCKET # TRIAL  M F I. PRIMARY OFFENSE: If Qualifier, please check ____A ____S ____C ____R (A=Attempt, S=Solicitation, C=Conspiracy, R=Reclassification)

FELONY F.S.# DESCRIPTION OFFENSE POINTS DEGREE LEVEL

_______/ ___________/ ___________________________________________/ __________/ (Level - Points: 1=4, 2=10, 3=16, 4=22, 5=28, 6=36, 7=56, 8=74, 9=92, 10=116) Prior capital felony triples Primary Offense points  I. ________

II. ADDITIONAL OFFENSE(S): Supplemental page attached  DOCKET# FEL/MM F.S.# OFFENSE QUALIFY COUNTS POINTS TOTAL DEGREE LEVEL A S C R _____________/ _________/ ______________/ _________     _______ x ______ = ______ DESCRIPTION ________________________________________________________________________________

_____________/ ________/ ______________/ _________     _______ X ______ = ______ DESCRIPTION ________________________________________________________________________________

_____________/ ________/ _____________/ _________     _______ X ______ = ______ DESCRIPTION ________________________________________________________________________________

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

Related

§ 948.20
Florida § 948.20

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-amendments-to-florida-rule-of-criminal-procedure-3992-fla-2022.