Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

529 So. 2d 1251

Docket No. 88-15.

Davis v. State

Michael Livingston DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 18, 1988.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1988-08-18

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“entitled to have the record set straight even if there is little possibility that the total time actually spent in jail will be affected”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Lopez-Vasquez v. State

Relies on Anders v. California · Disinger v. State · 519 So. 2d 718 - Cummins v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1988-08-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 2013

8 state decisions

301988199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1252 James B. Gibson, Public Defender and Brynn Newton, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee and Colin Campbell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

¶3ORFINGER, Judge.

¶4The defendant was sentenced under one scoresheet for multiple offenses, the scoresheet indicating a presumptive guidelines range of 12-30 months. Defendant was sentenced to a three year term of incarceration for each felony conviction, each to be served concurrently. Two of the felony convictions were offenses for which defendant had been placed on probation, now revoked. Therefore, as to those offenses, the trial court could properly bump up the sentences to the three year guidelines range. Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.701 d.14. Another conviction carried a three year mandatory minimum term of incarceration, so the trial court was authorized to exceed the guidelines range as to that offense. Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.701 d.9.

¶5As to the remaining felony convictions, the sentences for those offenses should not have exceeded the guidelines range of 12-30 months without stating a reason for departure. See Cummins v. State,519 So.2d 718 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). The appellate public defender in the Anders[1] brief claims that there is no prejudicial error since the sentences run concurrent. Nevertheless, the defendant is entitled to have the record set straight even if there is little possibility that the total time actually spent in jail will be affected. See, e.g., Disinger v. State,526 So.2d 213 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). We remand the case to the trial court for resentencing as to the felonies committed subsequent to defendant being placed on probation for which there is no mandatory term of incarceration.

¶6REMANDED with instructions.

¶7DAUKSCH and DANIEL, JJ., concur.

NOTES

¶8[1] Anders v. California,386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

/529/so2d/1251 · .json · Public domain