JONNY SANDERS
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.
Jonny Sanders appealed his petit theft conviction and the denial of his amended motion to correct sentencing error. The court affirmed the conviction but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the scoring of prior convictions included on his sentencing scoresheet.
The court affirmed Sanders' conviction but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the amended Rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. Once contested, the State must provide competent evidence supporting the prior convictions included on the scoresheet, and a claim that the scoresheet erroneously included prior convictions requires an evidentiary hearing.
[1] When a defendant contests prior convictions included on a sentencing scoresheet in a Rule 3.800(b) motion, the trial court must hold an evidentiary hearing to determine w…
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“Once contested, the State [is] required to provide competent evidence that [the d]efendant had committed these crimes.”
Citing Dresch v. State, 150 So. 3d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
Sanders was convicted of petit theft and received a sentence calculated using a scoresheet that included multiple prior convictions. Sanders filed an …
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 Burden Of Proof For Prior Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Jonny Sanders, appeals his conviction for petit theft, as well as the denial of his amended motion to correct sentencing error. We affirm his conviction without discussion. However, we reverse and remand for the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing on Appellant’s motion to correct the scoring of his prior record.
During the pendency of this appeal, Appellant filed an amended motion to correct sentencing error, pursuant Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), challenging various prior convictions listed on his scoresheet. Because it does not appear that the trial court ruled on the motion within sixty days after filing, the motion is deemed denied. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B).
Having challenged multiple prior convictions included on his scoresheet in his amended rule 3.800(b) motion, Appellant argues that the State was required to introduce competent evidence in support of its scoring of Appellant’s prior record and failed to do so. “Once contested, the State [is] required to provide competent evidence that [the d]efendant had committed these crimes.” Dresch v. State, 150 So. 3d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (citing Lyons v. State, 823 So. 2d 250, 250–51 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (holding the state had the burden of providing competent evidence that the defendant had committed a past conviction, when the defendant challenged the inclusion of the past conviction in a rule 3.800(b) motion)).
On appeal, the State concedes this point, asserting the matter should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the amended 3.800(b)(2) motion. “A claim that a defendant’s scoresheet erroneously included as scored prior convictions crimes for which he or she had never been convicted requires an evidentiary hearing.” Murphy v. State, 273 So. 3d 1147 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (quoting Purifoy v. State, 10 So. 3d 197, 200 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)); see also Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B) (directing trial courts to follow the procedure under rule 3.800(b)(1)(B), which provides that an evidentiary hearing should be held if necessary).
Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing on Appellant’s 3.800(b)(2) motion and for the court to then resentence him if necessary. See Murphy, 273 So. 3d at 1147.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. CONNER, C.J., MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vinson Kearse v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)…e trial court did not rule on the motion within 60 days, so it was deemed denied. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B). Appellant filed his rule 3.800(b)(2) motion where he had contested three prior convictions on his scoresheet. See Sanders v. State, 333 So. 3d 235, 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022). Appellant contested the points he received for the following three convictions: (1) 14 points for each of two convictions of burglary of an unoccupied conveyance, (2) 23 points for a conviction of lewd or lascivious moles…
-
Taylor v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)…re not analogous to the Florida crime used for the scoring, the appellant was entitled to seek an evidentiary hearing, requiring the State to provide competent evidence in support of its scoring of the appellant’s prior record. See Sanders v. State, 333 So. 3d 235, 235-36 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (“Having challenged multiple prior convictions included on his scoresheet in his amended rule 3.800(b) motion, [the appellant] correctly argues that the State was required to introduce competent evidence in support of its…
Authorities Cited
- Lyons v. State, 823 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Dresch v. State, 150 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- Purifoy v. State, 10 So. 3d 197 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)