Schott v. State

641 So. 2d 465, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8100, 1994 WL 440576
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 17, 1994·No. No. 93-3366·Published·Cited by 3 cases

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

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

641 So. 2d 465 (Schott v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Polanco v. State
710 So. 2d 63 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Mills v. State
690 So. 2d 735 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Davis v. State
652 So. 2d 503 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)