State v. Hanks

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Hanks

700 So. 2d 779, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11850, 1997 WL 637651

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 17, 1997

DocketNo. 97-00862

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 700 So. 2d 779 (State v. Hanks) 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

State v. Hanks, 700 So. 2d 779, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11850, 1997 WL 637651 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

CAMPBELL, Judge.

The state appeals the trial court order striking eighteen points from appellee’s scoresheet for possession of a firearm pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.702(d)(1). Although we conclude that the eighteen points should not have been stricken under State v. Davidson, 666 So.2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), and White v. State, 689 So.2d 371 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), review granted, 696 So.2d 343 (Fla.1997), since the addition of the points does not affect appellee’s sentence, we affirm the order placing him on three years’ probation. We remand • this ease, however, with directions to the trial court to correct the scoresheet by adding the disputed eighteen points pursuant to our holding in Davidson, 666 So.2d 941, and White, 689 So.2d 371. Because it might become necessary to use the scoresheet in the future, it is important that it be correct, and therefore, the lack of effect on appellee’s present sentence does not render the error immaterial. We also certify conflict with Galloway v. State, 680 So.2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), as was done in White, 689 So.2d 371.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LAZZARA, J., concur.

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

CAMPBELL, Judge.

The state appeals the trial court order striking eighteen points from appellee’s scoresheet for possession of a firearm pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.702(d)(1). Although we conclude that the eighteen points should not have been stricken under State v. Davidson, 666 So.2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), and White v. State, 689 So.2d 371 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), review granted, 696 So.2d 343 (Fla.1997), since the addition of the points does not affect appellee’s sentence, we affirm the order placing him on three years’ probation. We remand • this ease, however, with directions to the trial court to correct the scoresheet by adding the disputed eighteen points pursuant to our holding in Davidson, 666 So.2d 941, and White, 689 So.2d 371. Because it might become necessary to use the scoresheet in the future, it is important that it be correct, and therefore, the lack of effect on appellee’s present sentence does not render the error immaterial. We also certify conflict with Galloway v. State, 680 So.2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), as was done in White, 689 So.2d 371.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LAZZARA, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

700 So. 2d 779, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11850, 1997 WL 637651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hanks-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack