BENNIE R. SMARR, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 court held that the defendant is entitled to be resentenced under Heggs v. State because he was adversely affected by unconstitutional sentencing guidelines.
[1] A defendant is entitled to resentencing when convicted under unconstitutional sentencing guidelines, even if the sentence imposed falls within a valid sentencing range ca…
[2] When offenses are committed under different versions of sentencing guidelines due to constitutional infirmities, separate scoresheets must be used for each applicable gui…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSmarr was convicted of sexual battery and incest and sentenced under the 1995 guidelines. The trial court used two different scoresheets due to consti…
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 Constitutional Infirmity cases and more on FLexlaw
[*44] PER CURIAM.
Bennie R. Smarr appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for correction of his sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because Smarr is entitled to be resentenced under Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000), we reverse.
Smarr was convicted of two counts of sexual battery on a child under the age of sixteen while in a position of familial authority and one count of incest. He was sentenced under the 1995 guidelines. The trial court noted that one of the sexual batteries occurred after the constitutional infirmities in the guidelines were cured. See Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla.2000). The trial court then found that under the 1994 guidelines, as applied to the other two counts, Smarr would have scored in a range between 82.35 months to 137.35 months. His score on the other count, under the valid 1995 guidelines, was 115.35 months to 192.25 months. The trial court reasoned that because two different scoresheets were used, Smarr could have received consecutive sentences, and his original twenty-two year sentence would fall within the range of the scoresheets. The trial court concluded that Smarr was not adversely affected by the unconstitutional 1995 scoresheet and denied relief.
While the finding of the trial court is logical, it is not in line with the directive of the supreme court in Heggs. Under the 1994 guidelines, Smarr’s sentence is a departure sentence. Consequently, he is adversely affected by the amendments found unconstitutional in Heggs and must be re-sentenced on one of the sexual battery convictions and on the incest conviction. See Heggs 759 So. 2d at 627. Because section 921.0014(3), Florida Statutes (1997), requires separate scoresheets for offenses committed when different versions of the guidelines sentencing scoresheets are applicable, Smarr must be resentenced on all of his convictions pursuant to the guidelines applicable to each conviction. See State v. White, 762 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Reversed and remanded.
BLUE, A.C.J., and GREEN and STRINGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Xzavier Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2000)
- State v. Cresandra White, 762 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)