Sizemore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sizemore v. State

737 So. 2d 1155, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 8546, 1999 WL 426460

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 25, 1999

DocketNo. 99-460

StatusPublished

This text of 737 So. 2d 1155 (Sizemore 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

Sizemore v. State, 737 So. 2d 1155, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 8546, 1999 WL 426460 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

ANTOON, J.

G.H. Sizemore appeals the order entered by the trial court denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal [1156]*1156Procedure. He contends in part that he is entitled to receive postconviction relief because an improperly recalculated sentencing guidelines scoresheet was used by the trial court. This claim is not rebutted by the attachments filed with this court. Therefore, we remand this matter to permit the trial court to further address Mr. Sizemore’s claim by either providing an attachment which supports the scoresheet calculation or conducting an evidentiary hearing in accordance with Guinto v. State, 693 So.2d 46, 48 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Mr. Sizemore’s other claims for postconviction relief are without merit.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

DAUKSCH and W. SHARP, JJ„ concur.

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

ANTOON, J.

G.H. Sizemore appeals the order entered by the trial court denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal [1156]*1156Procedure. He contends in part that he is entitled to receive postconviction relief because an improperly recalculated sentencing guidelines scoresheet was used by the trial court. This claim is not rebutted by the attachments filed with this court. Therefore, we remand this matter to permit the trial court to further address Mr. Sizemore’s claim by either providing an attachment which supports the scoresheet calculation or conducting an evidentiary hearing in accordance with Guinto v. State, 693 So.2d 46, 48 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Mr. Sizemore’s other claims for postconviction relief are without merit.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

DAUKSCH and W. SHARP, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

737 So. 2d 1155, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 8546, 1999 WL 426460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sizemore-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack