Sheffield v. State, CASE NO. 1D16–1319

• Decision Date: 23 March 2017
• Docket Number: CASE NO. 1D16–1319
• Citation: 214 So.3d 763
• Parties: Andre SHEFFIELD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

214 So.3d 763

Andre SHEFFIELD, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D16–1319

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed March 23, 2017

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Tayo Popoola, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Previously, in Sheffield v. State , 177 So.3d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), this court reversed appellant's prison releasee reoffender sentence for possession of cocaine (count III) and remanded for resentencing because possession of cocaine was not a qualifying offense under the prison releasee reoffender statute. In this subsequent appeal, appellant correctly claims that the trial court erred in resentencing him based on an erroneously calculated guidelines scoresheet. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing.

The 1995 guidelines scoresheet improperly included aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer (count I) as the "primary offense" and resisting an officer with violence (count II) as an "additional offense" because appellant was sentenced for those charges under the prison releasee reoffender statute, which is not governed by the sentencing guidelines. See § 775.082(8)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (1997) (providing that "[u]pon proof from the state attorney that establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant is a prison releasee reoffender as defined in this section, such defendant is not eligible for sentencing under the sentencing guide

214 So.3d 764

lines...."). In similar cases, Florida appellate courts repeatedly have held that when the trial court imposes a habitual offender sentence for an offense, the trial court removes that offense from sentencing under the guidelines and cannot include that offense either as a primary or additional offense on the guidelines scoresheet. See Olsen v. State , 791 So.2d 558, 560 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) ; Drayton v. State , 744 So.2d 584, 585–86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) ; Alexander v. State , 680 So.2d 635 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) ; Byrd v. State , ...