Schott v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Schott v. State

641 So. 2d 465, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8100, 1994 WL 440576

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 17, 1994

DocketNo. 93-3366

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 641 So. 2d 465 (Schott 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

Schott v. State, 641 So. 2d 465, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8100, 1994 WL 440576 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We vacate defendant’s sentence and remand for resentencing because of an error in the sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The scoresheet reflects that points were assessed for legal constraint based on an outstanding capias, however, the state did not establish that the capias was outstanding at the time these crimes were committed. Kinman v. State, 550 So.2d 1190, 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).

Defendant also argues that the trial court failed to adequately determine whether his [466]*466plea was voluntary. Because this is a direct appeal from a guilty plea, and defendant made no motion in the trial court to withdraw the plea, we affirm on that issue. Robinson v. State, 373 So.2d 898, 902 (Fla.1979).

REVERSED IN PART AND AFFIRMED IN PART.

ANSTEAD, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

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