Paul v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Paul v. State

735 So. 2d 572, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 7894, 1999 WL 391891

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 16, 1999·No. No. 99-646·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As the state correctly asserts, because the trial judge was aware of the recommended sentencing guidelines and the sentences imposed for the appellant’s non-capital offenses did not exceed the recommended guidelines, the court’s failure to use a scoresheet did not constitute reversible error. See Stokes v. State, 476 So.2d 313, 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The court’s failure to use a scoresheet in this case was [573]*573harmless — at best. See Hamilton v. State, 537 So.2d 194, 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Williams v. State, 529 So.2d 366, 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We therefore affirm the order denying the appellant’s motion made pursuant to rule 3.800, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

As the state correctly asserts, because the trial judge was aware of the recommended sentencing guidelines and the sentences imposed for the appellant’s non-capital offenses did not exceed the recommended guidelines, the court’s failure to use a scoresheet did not constitute reversible error. See Stokes v. State, 476 So.2d 313, 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The court’s failure to use a scoresheet in this case was [573]*573harmless — at best. See Hamilton v. State, 537 So.2d 194, 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Williams v. State, 529 So.2d 366, 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We therefore affirm the order denying the appellant’s motion made pursuant to rule 3.800, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Affirmed.

Paul v. State, 735 So. 2d 572, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 7894, 1999 WL 391891 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

735 So. 2d 572 (Paul v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related