Brown v. State, 87-647
| Decision Date | 10 June 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-647,87-647 |
| Citation | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1477,508 So.2d 522 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1477 Herman Dwayne BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Herman Brown appeals from an order summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief filed with the trial court pursuant to Rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. We reverse because of the particularly unique circumstances before us.
Brown maintains that his sentencing guideline scoresheet reflected 24 points for "victim injury" notwithstanding that such injury was not an element of any of the offenses for which he was convicted, i.e., robbery, kidnapping, grand theft and burglary. 1 If Brown's contention is factually correct, adding 24 points to the scoresheet was improper. Toney v. State, 456 So.2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Thus, Brown claims that the deletion of the extra points results in a reduction in the range of the presumptive sentence. It is our view that Brown's motion generates a question of law which may be raised at any time free from a requirement that the error be preserved by a contemporaneous objection or presented in an appeal. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.800(a). 2 The sentence imposed upon Brown, if his position is factually sound, is illegal. State v. Whitfield, 487 So.2d 1045 (Fla.1986); see Lomont v. State, 506 So.2d 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
The trial court did not impose a presumptive sentence upon Brown; instead it departed upward. 3 If his present challenge to the sentence were urged on appeal, and were supported by the record, we would be compelled to reverse in the absence of evidence disclosing beyond a reasonable doubt that the trial court would have departed to the extent it did notwithstanding that the presumptive sentence was less than that indicated by the scoresheet. Parker v. State, 478 So.2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Scott v. State, 469 So.2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Thus, the significant question Brown raises, and the only one we answer, is whether Rule 3.800(a), as amended in Whitfield, applies when the presumptive sentence is initially miscalculated and the trial court subsequently determines that enhancement is warranted for clear and convincing reasons. We answer in the affirmative. Parker v. State, 506 So.2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
We emphasize the difference between correcting an error which, if Brown's factual allegations are true, is plain, and determining whether that error affected the ultimate sentence. Hence, upon remand the trial court is first to determine whether Brown's scoresheet includes the additional points for victim injury. If it does not, the court may again deny the motion but either a scoresheet or other evidence relied upon to support its finding should be attached to the order. If, on the other hand, the scoresheet confirms the validity of Brown's factual assertion, the trial court should then examine the record to determine whether scoring victim injury was proper. If the addition of points for victim injury is justified, any evidence indicating that the additional 24 points are proper should be attached to the trial court's order. Alternatively, if the 24 points did not affect the presumptive sentence, the error is harmless and Brown's motion may properly be denied. Bradley v. State, 480 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), petition for review dismissed, 486 So.2d 595 (Fla.1986). Moreover, if Brown's factual allegations prove to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Johnson v. State
...2d DCA 1987); Schneider v. State, 512 So.2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Brown v. State, 510 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Brown v. State, 508 So.2d 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Roberts v. State, 507 So.2d 761 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Watkins v. State, 498 So.2d 576 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), upheld on confes......
-
Rowe v. State, 88-4
...would have imposed the same sentence notwithstanding any possible scoresheet errors. Thus resentencing is not required. Brown v. State, 508 So.2d 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Brown v. State, 507 So.2d 764 (Fla. 1st DCA Rowe's final prayer for relief concerns the plea bargain itself. He believes ......
-
Dupont v. State
...the court would be justified in again denying Dupont's motion. Orsi v. State, 515 So.2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Brown v. State, 508 So.2d 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Any party aggrieved by the subsequent action of the trial court must file a notice of appeal within thirty days to obtain further......
-
McGowan v. State, 91-208
...errors are such that make his sentence "illegal", whether or not the errors could have been raised by a direct appeal. 5 Brown v. State, 508 So.2d 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). In Brown, the court held that a sentence based on a scoresheet which improperly included points for victim injury was an......