MICHAEL ARMAND DELORME
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Michael Armand Delorme appealed the denial of his motion to correct a sentencing error in a violation of probation case. The trial court improperly included seventeen counts of third-degree grand theft as "additional offenses" on the sentencing scoresheet, even though Delorme had already completed sentences for those counts before violating probation. The State conceded error, and the appellate court agreed that these completed offenses did not qualify as "pending" offenses under Florida law.
The court reversed and remanded for resentencing, holding that the seventeen counts of third-degree grand theft were improperly scored as "additional offenses" because they were not "pending before the court for sentencing at the time of the primary offense" as required by Florida Statute 921.0021(1). Offenses completed prior to a probation violation do not fit the statutory definition of "additional offense" and cannot be scored during a VOP sentencing proceeding.
[1] An offense for which a defendant has completed service of sentence prior to a violation of probation cannot be scored as an additional offense in sentencing on the violat…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Offenses over which the trial court no longer has jurisdiction cannot be scored as additional offenses during a sentencing proceeding following a violation of probation because they do not fit the definition of 'additional offense' set out in section 921.0021”
Court citation to Sanders v. State
Delorme was sentenced on a violation of probation charge based on a sentencing scoresheet that listed seventeen counts of third-degree grand theft as …
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 Primary Offense cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, Michael Armand Delorme, appeals the denial of his motion to correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). In the motion, Appellant argued that he was sentenced on a violation of probation based on an incorrect scoresheet. Specifically, he alleged that there were seventeen counts of third-degree grand theft erroneously listed on the scoresheet as “additional offense(s).” The State agrees that the trial court erred. Because Appellant completed his sentences for those seventeen counts of third-degree grand theft prior to the time he violated his probation, and therefore, those counts were not “pending before the court for sentencing at the time of the primary offense,” we agree the scoresheet was scored improperly. See § 921.0021(1), Fla. Stat. (2011) (defining “[a]dditional offense” as “any offense other than the primary offense for which an offender is convicted and which is pending before the court for sentencing at the time of the primary offense” (emphasis added)); see also Sanders v. State, 35 So. 3d 864, 866 (Fla. 2010) (“Offenses over which the trial court no longer has jurisdiction cannot be scored as additional offenses during a sentencing proceeding following a violation of probation because they do not fit the definition of ‘additional offense’ set out in section 921.0021, Florida Statutes (1999).”); Somps v. State, 183 So. 3d 1090, 1092 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (“An offense should not be scored as an additional offense following the revocation of a defendant’s probation if the defendant completed his sentence as to that offense before the VOP occurred.”). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing.
Reverse and remand for resentencing. MAY and CIKLIN, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.