From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Roux v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Mar 31, 1993
615 So. 2d 879 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

No. 93-00508.

March 31, 1993.

Appeal pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(g) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; E. Randolph Bentley, Judge.


James Roux appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct sentence.

The motion is based on Karchesky v. State, 591 So.2d 930 (Fla. 1992). The trial court denied relief after finding that the legislature effectively has overridden the Karchesky decision. However, this court has previously held that the 1992 legislation cannot be applied to crimes committed, as was Roux's, before its effective date. Harrelson v. State, 616 So.2d 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

The trial court also attempted to demonstrate, citing a medical report, that actual injury was suffered in this case. See Morris v. State, 605 So.2d 511 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). However, this report, assuming it would be admissible in the face of hearsay objections, establishes only that "sexual intercourse . . . occurred." The supreme court has expressed its opinion, in Karchesky, that "penetration" and "injury" are not synonymous.

We remand this case for further consideration of Roux's motion in light of Harrelson.

Reversed.

RYDER, Acting C.J., and DANAHY and FRANK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Roux v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Mar 31, 1993
615 So. 2d 879 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

Roux v. State

Case Details

Full title:JAMES UZELL ROUX, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Mar 31, 1993

Citations

615 So. 2d 879 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Harper v. State

Because appellant's sentencing scoresheet indicates that the victim injury points were assessed for…