Harrison v. State, 87-424
| Decision Date | 12 April 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-424,87-424 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 934 James HARRISON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Marti Rothenberg, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Nancy C. Wear, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and FERGUSON, JJ.
In 1984, the appellant Harrison was a lookout in an armed supermarket robbery in which, unknown to him, two co-defendants killed a night watchman. As a result, Harrison pled guilty to second degree murder (Count I), burglary of an occupied structure with an assault committed therein (Count II), and attempted robbery with a deadly weapon (Count III). He was sentenced to two years in prison as to Count I, followed by concurrent terms of four years probation on Counts II and III. He served his two year state prison time, but shortly after his release he was found in possession of cocaine which, in the instant case, the trial court determined to have been a violation of his probation. His sentencing upon the consequent revocation is the only issue involved in this appeal.
Acting under the misapprehension that the original sentence for the second degree murder count had been two years imprisonment followed by four years probation and thus that Harrison was on probation for that charge at the time of sentencing, the trial court treated the second degree murder as the primary offense under the guidelines. That calculation yielded a recommendation of 12-17 years with a probation up-tick to 17-22 years. Accordingly, it imposed three sentences on Counts I, II and III totalling 22 years in the state prison. As the state concedes, we must reverse.
Since the defendant had completely served the sentence actually imposed for second degree murder, it is an obvious double jeopardy violation to resentence him as to that charge. Fasenmyer v. State, 457 So.2d 1361 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1035, 105 S.Ct. 1407, 84 L.Ed.2d 796 (1985). The murder conviction must instead be treated only as a prior offense in the guidelines calculation, see Peterson v. State, 506 So.2d 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), which in turn, must be based upon the guidelines in effect at the time of the offense, Miller v. Florida, 470 U.S. ----, 107 S.Ct. 2446, 96 L.Ed.2d 351 (1987), with the burglary charge treated as the primary offense.
In making that computation, we hold that no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. State, 88-1291
...whether Shull v. Dugger, 515 So.2d 748 (Fla.1987) prohibits the imposition of a departure sentence upon remand. In Harrison v. State, 523 So.2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), as in the instant case, the trial court imposed what amounted to an upward departure, under the mistaken impression that th......
-
State v. Vanhorn
...above reasons independent of the others. Vanhorn again appealed to the Third District Court. Based on its decision in Harrison v. State, 523 So.2d 726 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1988), the district court reversed the departure sentence and remanded for imposition of a guidelines As Vanhorn now acknowled......
-
Roberts v. State
...was due to an improper calculation of the sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The district court certified conflict with Harrison v. State, 523 So.2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed, we approve the instant district court d......
-
Aleman v. State, 87-2515
...but see Smith v. State, 526 So.2d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); see also Scurry v. State, 489 So.2d 25 (Fla.1986); cf. Harrison v. State, 523 So.2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (no additional points for victim injury where victim's injury was subject of defendant's conviction for second degree murder......