Stokes v. State, BC-452
| Decision Date | 10 October 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. BC-452,BC-452 |
| Parties | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2329 Isaac STOKES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Michael E. Allen, Public Defender; and Paula S. Saunders, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen.; and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant appeals a judgment and sentence filed after entry of an order revoking his probation, finding him guilty of aggravated battery and sentencing him to two years in prison. We affirm.
The only issue raised by appellant which merits discussion is whether the trial court erred in sentencing him pursuant to the sentencing guidelines without the benefit of a scoresheet as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(1). The record shows that at the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor and the defense attorney agreed that the recommended sentencing range for appellant under the guidelines, with one cell enhancement under rule 3.701(d)(14), would be twelve to thirty months. The only disagreement concerned whether appellant's sentence could be enhanced one cell pursuant to rule 3.701(d)(14). Although the judge did so enhance appellant's sentence, that issue has not been raised on appeal.
The requirement of rule 3.701(d)(1) that the sentencing judge approve a scoresheet is mandatory. See Gage v. State, 461 So.2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Although not the preferable procedure to follow, the failure of the trial judge to comply with that rule and the consequent absence of a guidelines scoresheet in the record does not constitute reversible error in the instant case since the trial judge was correctly apprised by both counsel for the State and counsel for the defense as to appellant's undisputed guidelines score, and since the trial judge did not depart from the guidelines recommendation. Compare Davis v. State, 461 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mitchell v. State, BJ-113
...this fact alone is not necessarily reversible error because the trial judge knew the correct recommended range. See Stokes v. State, 476 So.2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Since we reverse on other grounds, however, the scoresheet should, on remand, be amended to reflect the correct The judge g......
-
Houston v. State, BL-439
...3.701(d), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, requires a sentencing guidelines scoresheet in every case, but cites Stokes v. State, 476 So.2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), for the proposition that it would be inappropriate to require one where all parties agree on the length of the negotiated A......
-
Pedrero v. State, 85-1389
...Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(1) requires the preparation of a scoresheet. This requirement is mandatory. Stokes v. State, 476 So.2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The record on appeal establishes that no scoresheet was filed in the trial This court has held that if all parties are ......
-
Lawson v. State, BL-474
...L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Although the issue of the absence of a scoresheet was raised in that brief, appellate counsel cited Stokes v. State, 476 So.2d 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) for the proposition that a scoresheet should not be required where all parties have agreed to a negotiated sentence. App......