STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
ALAN MITCHELL RODGERS, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The State appealed a trial court's sentencing decision in a probation violation case involving two counts of indecent assault. The appellate court found the trial court did not err in the sentence imposed but reversed and remanded because the court improperly awarded time-served credit from the original sentence against the probation violation sentence and because the sentencing guidelines scoresheet required correction.
The trial court did not err in imposing the three and one-half year sentence itself, as a properly prepared scoresheet places the score in the three and one-half to four and one-half years range. However, the trial court erred in crediting 580 days for time served because the time was served on Count I, and the sentences were ordered to run consecutively, so the credit could not be applied to Count II.
[1] A trial court must score multiple counts of the same distinct offense and same degree of felony as additional offenses at conviction, not in the prior record category.
[2] A trial court must approve a corrected scoresheet when the original scoresheet is improperly prepared.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The sexual assault charge in Count I of the original information which resulted in the sentence of three and one-half years' imprisonment should have been scored as an additional offense at conviction. It should not have been scored in the "prior record" category.”
Establishes the proper method for scoring multiple counts under the sentencing guidelines.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellee Rodgers pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent assault and was sentenced on November 26, 1984 to three and one-half years imprisonment on C…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prior Record Scoring cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We grant appellant’s motion for clarification and substitute the following revised opinion:
Appellee pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent assault. On November 26, 1984 the trial court sentenced him to three and one-half years imprisonment on Count I, and five years probation on Count II, the sentences to run consecutively. Appellee completed his prison term. However on December 11, 1987, the state filed an affidavit charging him with violation of his probation for Count II.
At the violation hearing, the state attorney argued that appellee’s guidelines score placed him in the five and one-half to seven years range and apparently prepared a scoresheet reflecting that recommended sentence. The public defender argued that appellant’s score placed him in the two and one-half to three and one-half years range. The trial court found that appellant violated his probation and sentenced him to three and one-half years incarceration with a credit of 580 days for time served. The state contends the sentence constitutes a downward departure from the guidelines without written reasons and that the trial court erred in awarding credit for time served On the sentence for Count I against the sentence for Count II.
The trial court did not err in imposing a three and one-half year sentence. The sexual assault charge in Count I of the original information which resulted in the sentence of three and one-half years’ imprisonment should have been scored as an additional offense at conviction. It should not have been scored in the “prior record” category. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(4) and (5). The two sexual assault charges constituted multiple counts of the same distinct offense and the same degree of felony. See the December, 1985 amendment to the committee note to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(4). With a properly prepared scoresheet, appellee’s score places him in the three and one-half to four and one-half years range. Although we find no departure from the guidelines, we remand so that the trial court may approve a corrected scoresheet. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(1).
We find merit in the state’s argument that the trial court erred in crediting appellee with 580 days for time served. The original sentencing order provided that the sentences for the crimes charged in Count I and Count II of the information were to run consecutively. The time served by appellee was on Count I. Therefore, the trial court erred when it credited this time to the sentence for Count II. See Hipp v. State, 509 So. 2d 1208, 1210 (Fla. 4th DCA1987). Similarly, we find no merit in appellee’s argument that he properly received credit for 105 days served while awaiting disposition on the original charges since he received credit for that time in the original sentence for Count I.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
DELL, GUNTHER and STONE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tripp v. State, 622 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1993)…o. 2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Pacheco v. State, 565 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 289 (Fla.1991); Harris v. State, 557 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); State v. Folsom, 552 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); State v. Rodgers, 540 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). However, the court expressed concern that its holding might conflict with the spirit of the sentencing guidelines and the limitations on sentencing imposed by this Court in State v. Lambert, 545 So. 2d 838 (Fla.1989), and State…
-
State v. Tripp, 591 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…decision follows similar decisions of the Fourth and Fifth Districts. Sylvester v. State, 572 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Ford v. State, 572 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); State v. Folsom, 552 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); State v. Rodgers, 540 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). Because the sentencing method approved in this case is not expressly recognized in Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1988), and may conflict with the spirit of the sentencing guidelines and the limitations imposed in Lambert v…
-
State v. Folsom, 552 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…incarceration previously served on the first sentence. The State appeals this allowance of credit for time served on the prior sentence against a separate and distinct consecutive sentence. The State is correct and we reverse. See State v. Rodgers, 540 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). REVERSED and REMANDED for the entry of a corrected sentence. COBB and HARRIS, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hipp v. State, 509 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)