State v. Paul

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Paul

537 So. 2d 702, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 349, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 361, 1989 WL 6247

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 1, 1989

DocketNo. 88-1951

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 537 So. 2d 702 (State v. Paul) 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. Paul, 537 So. 2d 702, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 349, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 361, 1989 WL 6247 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand for resentencing. When the sentencing court does not have an accurate scoresheet before it or does not approve the scoresheet, prior to rendering sentence, reversal for resentencing based on an accurate and approved guidelines scoresheet is warranted. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(1); Richards v. State, 502 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Parker v. State, 506 So.2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Jaggers v. State, 492 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The parties’ dispute over the accuracy of the guidelines scoresheet, the absence of proof as to its accuracy, and the fact that the trial court did not approve the score-sheet prior to rendering sentencing compels that the sentence imposed be vacated. Resentencing does not preclude the trial court from modifying the original sentence of one year and one day upon consideration of an accurate and approved scoresheet.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT HEREWITH.

GLICKSTEIN, WALDEN and STONE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand for resentencing. When the sentencing court does not have an accurate scoresheet before it or does not approve the scoresheet, prior to rendering sentence, reversal for resentencing based on an accurate and approved guidelines scoresheet is warranted. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(1); Richards v. State, 502 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Parker v. State, 506 So.2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Jaggers v. State, 492 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The parties’ dispute over the accuracy of the guidelines scoresheet, the absence of proof as to its accuracy, and the fact that the trial court did not approve the score-sheet prior to rendering sentencing compels that the sentence imposed be vacated. Resentencing does not preclude the trial court from modifying the original sentence of one year and one day upon consideration of an accurate and approved scoresheet.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT HEREWITH.

GLICKSTEIN, WALDEN and STONE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

537 So. 2d 702, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 349, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 361, 1989 WL 6247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-paul-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack