From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jul 10, 1991
582 So. 2d 157 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 90-2278.

July 10, 1991.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Martin County, Paul B. Kanarek, J.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Mallorye Cunningham, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Carol Cobourn Asbury, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


We affirm appellant's conviction but reverse and remand for a new sentencing hearing because the trial judge did not have appellant's guidelines scoresheet available at sentencing. Kolbe v. State, 480 So.2d 694 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). During the course of this appeal we relinquished jurisdiction to reconstruct a guidelines scoresheet. The reconstructed scoresheet revealed that the first scoresheet which was unavailable to the judge at sentencing was erroneously computed. Appellant is entitled to have his sentence imposed after the trial court has the opportunity to consider the correctly calculated scoresheet. See Gibbons v. State, 540 So.2d 144 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). In the instant case, the corrected scoresheet revealed a lower guidelines range than what the trial court was informed was the range at the first sentencing. This may very well affect the sentence the trial court would have initially imposed.

ANSTEAD, HERSEY and WARNER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Smith v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jul 10, 1991
582 So. 2d 157 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

Smith v. State

Case Details

Full title:EARL R. SMITH, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jul 10, 1991

Citations

582 So. 2d 157 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)