Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

660 So. 2d 406

Hall v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 18, 1995

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1995-09-18

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1998

3 state decisions

Relies on State v. Callaway · 651 So. 2d 781 - Peterson v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1995-09-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1In this direct criminal appeal, appellant challenges both his convictions and his sentences. We conclude that the challenge to the convictions lacks merit. Accordingly, we affirm the convictions without further discussion. However, because it appears from the *407face of the record that three convictions scored under “prior record” for purposes of computing the guidelines scoresheet were pending before this court on direct appeal at the time of sentencing, we vacate appellant’s sentences and remand to the trial court for resentencing using a recalculated scoresheet which omits those three convictions. See Peterson v. State, 651 So.2d 781 (Fla. 4th DCA), review granted, 658 So.2d 992 (Fla.1995).

¶2CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; SENTENCES VACATED; and CASE REMANDED, with directions.

WOLF, WEBSTER and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
/660/so2d/406 · .json · Public domain