MAJOR LEE GRUBBS, 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 a pre-sentence investigation report was mandatory before sentencing when the defendant had no prior felony offenses.
Appellant was convicted of assault with intent to commit murder and sentenced to 15 years. The trial court failed to receive and consider a pre-senten…
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 Presentence Investigation Report cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
Appellant was charged with first degree murder and convicted of assault with intent to commit murder. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison with credit for all time served.
We have considered the points raised by appellant and after review of the briefs and record, we find merit to only one contention: that the trial court failed, before sentencing, to receive and consider a report of pre-sentence investigation, as required by RCrP 3.710.
RCrP 3.710 provides:
In all cases in which the court has discretion as to what sentence may be imposed, the court may refer the case to the probation and parole commission for investigation and recommendation. No sentence or sentences other than probation shall be imposed on any defendant found guilty of a first felony offense or found guilty of a felony while under the age of 18 years, until after such investigation has first beeii made and the recommendations of the commission received and considered by the sentencing judge.
Since Rule 3.710 contemplates the report being prepared by the probation and parole commission, we reject the appellee’s contention that the trial judge’s inquiries, in effect, constituted a pre-sentence investigation.
There having been no suggestion in the record that the appellant had any prior felony offenses, it was mandatory for the trial court to request and consider a pre-sentence report prior to sentencing. Mitchum v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1974, 292 So. 2d 620; Lopes v. State, Fla.App.1975, 309 So. 2d 591, Opinion filed March 21, 1975.
Accordingly, we affirm as to the conviction, but the sentence is vacated and the case is remanded for resentencing by the trial court consistent with the requirements of RCrP 3.710.
BOARDMAN, A. C. J., and GRIMES, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lenson Hargrave v. State, 366 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1978)…(Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Still v. State, 296 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Nordone v. State, 307 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1975); Lopes v. State, 309 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1975); Buckles v. State, 310 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Grubbs v. State, 311 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1975); Davenport v. State, 317 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Beverly v. State, 330 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). The record shows that appellant had no prior felony convictions. He was thus entitled to the benefit of a presentence…
-
Diaz v. State, 369 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…the matter to the trial court to determine whether a pre-sentence report is necessary1 and, if so, with directions to set aside the sentence, order a pre-sentence report, and subsequent to review thereof impose a proper sentence. . Grubbs v. State, 311 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Davenport v. State, 317 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Beverly v. State, 330 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).…
Authorities Cited
- Mitchum v. State, 292 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Lopes v. State, 309 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)