Parker v. State, 1D04-1939.
| Decision Date | 31 August 2007 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D04-1939.,1D04-1939. |
| Parties | Lenorris PARKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appeallant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Alan R. Dakan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
The appellant, Lenorris Parker, raises several issues on direct appeal. Only one issue merits discussion. Mr. Parker contends that the trial court erred in sentencing him as a prison release reoffender because the State adduced only hearsay to prove the date of his release from prison. The State did not offer a witness to establish appellant's release date. At the original sentencing hearing, the State relied on inadmissible hearsay to establish appellant's release date, similar to evidence that the Court ruled insufficient in Gray v. State, 910 So.2d 867 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), review denied 920 So.2d 628 (Fla.2005). Relying on Gray, appellant filed a 3.800(b) motion to correct sentencing error. At the resentencing hearing the State relied on a "Certification of Records." The document introduced by the State during the resentencing hearing provided:
I, Ramona Cox-Pye, hereby certify that I am a custodian of records of the Florida Department of Corrections .... I hereby certify the following:
d) and that the attached computer data record is a true and correct copy of the original record contained in the official records of the Florida Department of Corrections maintained pursuant to Section 945.25.
Computer printouts detailing his intake, assignments, disciplinary records, and 7/20/02 release date were attached.
In Gray, the document the State offered to establish the date Mr. Gray had been released from prison purported to be a Department of Corrections employee's declaration or affirmation certifying that the seal in the letterhead was official, and that Mr. Gray was released on a certain date. As the panel on appeal noted,
Ms. Smith's statement constituted hear-say, and the State proved no proper predicate for its admission under any exception to the rule excluding hearsay. The document fails to identify the official records on which it relied, if any, does not state that it is a true and correct representation of any record, and does not say where or in whose custody any original official or business records are kept. As Ms. Smith's statement is essentially a (defective) affidavit devoid of any reference to records the DOC maintains, see Belvin v. State, 30 Fla. L. Weekly D1421, D1422, 2005 WL 1336497, ___ So.2d ___ (Fla. 4th DCA June 8, 2005) (), it is less deserving of consideration than the probation officer's testimony we held should have been excluded in the King case.
Gray, 910 So.2d at 869-870. The document introduced by the State at resentencing in the present case, however, does not suffer from the deficiencies noted with regard to the document at issue in Gray.
Section 90.902(11), Florida Statutes, provides:
90.902 Self-authentication.—Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility is not required...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ventura v. State
...I. See Yisrael II, 993 So.2d at 960-61; see also Smith v. State, 990 So.2d 1162, 1164-65 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Parker v. State, 973 So.2d 1167, 1168-69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), review denied, 1 So.3d 173, 2009 WL 427313 (Fla. Next, the district court improperly utilized an "overwhelming evidence"......
-
Yisrael v. State
...a business record if it had supplied the authentication required by sections 90.803(6) and 90.902(11). See, e.g., Parker v. State, 973 So.2d 1167, 1168-69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (holding that a DOC Crime and Time Report is admissible as a business record where a DOC records custodian supplies ......
-
Yisrael v. State
...a business record if it had supplied the authentication required by sections 90.803(6) and 90.902(11). See, e.g., Parker v. State, 973 So.2d 1167, 1168-69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (holding that a DOC Crime and Time Report is admissible as a business record where a DOC records custodian supplies ......
-
Heck v. State
...by the First District in Desue v. State, 908 So.2d 1116, 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), Gray, 910 So.2d at 869-70, and Parker v. State, 973 So.2d 1167, 1168-69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), review denied, No. SC07-1847, 1 So.3d 173, 2009 WL 427313 (Fla. Feb. 19, 2009), each of which was decided prior to ......
-
Judgment and sentence
...document, the affidavit is sufficient to establish defendant’s prior release date for PRR sentencing purposes. Parker v. State, 973 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) Court errs in imposing life as a PRR and 40 years as a habitual offender. To give an HO sentence for the same incident as a PRR......