Jarrell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jarrell v. State

224 So. 3d 890, 2017 WL 3584132, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 11947

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 21, 2017

DocketCASE NO. 1D16-3896

StatusPublished

This text of 224 So. 3d 890 (Jarrell 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

Jarrell v. State, 224 So. 3d 890, 2017 WL 3584132, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 11947 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.'

Appellant, convicted of traveling to meet a minor and unlawful use of a computer service, was successful before the trial court in arguing the dual convictions violated his right to double jeopardy protection. The trial court struck -the unlawful use conviction and sentence, but rejected his assertion that he should-be resentenced pursuant to a revised scoresheet which, upon vacation of the unlawful use offense, cut in half his lowest permissible prison sentence. The state has filed an answer brief in this Court in which it concedes that the trial court should consider a revised scoresheet when making its sentencing decision. We therefore reverse and remand for preparation of a revised score-sheet for the trial court to consider upon resentencing. See Lashley v. State, 194 So.3d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016); Hamilton v. State, 163 So.3d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (both remanding for resentencing following-revision of the scoresheets).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ROWE, MAKAR, and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM.'

Appellant, convicted of traveling to meet a minor and unlawful use of a computer service, was successful before the trial court in arguing the dual convictions violated his right to double jeopardy protection. The trial court struck -the unlawful use conviction and sentence, but rejected his assertion that he should-be resentenced pursuant to a revised scoresheet which, upon vacation of the unlawful use offense, cut in half his lowest permissible prison sentence. The state has filed an answer brief in this Court in which it concedes that the trial court should consider a revised scoresheet when making its sentencing decision. We therefore reverse and remand for preparation of a revised score-sheet for the trial court to consider upon resentencing. See Lashley v. State, 194 So.3d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016); Hamilton v. State, 163 So.3d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (both remanding for resentencing following-revision of the scoresheets).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ROWE, MAKAR, and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 So. 3d 890, 2017 WL 3584132, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 11947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jarrell-v-state-fladistctapp-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack