Parker v. State, 85-2818
| Decision Date | 01 May 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-2818,85-2818 |
| Citation | 506 So.2d 86,12 Fla. L. Weekly 1142 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1142 Ralph PARKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and W.H. Pasch, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Davis G. Anderson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
The appellant, Ralph Parker, appeals a trial court order denying his motion to set aside sentence. We find that the trial court erred in denying appellant's motion and, accordingly, reverse.
In 1984, a jury found appellant guilty of battery in violation of section 784.03, Florida Statutes (1983) (), resisting arrest with violence in violation of section 843.01, Florida Statutes (1983) (), and two counts of battery of a law enforcement officer in violation of section 784.07, Florida Statutes (1983) (third degree felonies). The guidelines scoresheet prepared for sentencing reflected 202 total points which resulted in a presumptive guidelines sentence of four and one-half to five and one-half years incarceration. After adjudging appellant a habitual offender, the trial court sentenced appellant to three concurrent ten year sentences on the third degree felony convictions and to a one year concurrent sentence on the first degree misdemeanor conviction.
On appeal, this court reversed the convictions on the two counts of battery of a law enforcement officer and remanded for a new trial on those charges. Parker v. State, 471 So.2d 1352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). After we remanded, the state nolle prossed the two charges, and appellant then filed a motion to set aside his original sentence on the remaining charges. The motion, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, alleged that appellant had been sentenced under an incorrect guidelines point total because the two nolle prossed felonies added extra points to his score and that the two felonies were also considered in determining whether he would be sentenced as a habitual offender. At the hearing on appellant's motion, the trial court found that even without the two nolle prossed charges, appellant had at least four felony convictions on his record. The trial court, therefore, upheld its original finding that appellant was a habitual offender. The court then held that since the three ten year sentences previously imposed were to be served concurrently, the ten year sentence originally imposed for resisting arrest with violence was proper. The appellant's motion to set aside his sentence was, accordingly, denied, and this timely appeal followed.
Although postconviction proceedings may not normally be used to raise for the first time issues which were or could have been raised on appeal, appellant had no reason to question the accuracy of the total points on his scoresheet at the time he first appealed his convictions and sentences. A computation error in a guidelines scoresheet, furthermore, may be raised for the first time on a motion for postconviction...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Parker
...the guidelines to demonstrate on the record, as a proper starting point, his awareness of the sentencing guidelines"); Parker v. State, 506 So.2d 86, 87 (Fla.App.1987) ("A correctly calculated scoresheet must be used by the trial court even though a departure sentence is imposed.").8 In Sta......
-
Blackwelder v. State
...independent basis by which his sentence might be readdressed. For Wahl that avenue of attack was the Smith decision. In Parker v. State, 506 So.2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), the defendant was eligible for resentencing by virtue of an incorrect scoresheet. In either case, Whitehead, decided in t......
-
Bush v. State, s. 87-737
...affect the guideline recommendation, Bush may be entitled to resentencing on the deadly missile charge. See, e.g., Parker v. State, 506 So.2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Our decision is therefore without prejudice to appellant to seek relief via Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), if ...
-
Brown v. State, 87-647
...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 deter......