Legal Opinion

Chapman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 26, 1996No. 95-1076PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence. The state has conceded that it was improper for the grand theft to be an “additional offense” under the sentencing guidelines’ confusing scheme. The grand theft should be the “primary offense” so that the court can legally habitualize the appellant on the burglary conviction and thus maximize the penalty, as the judge wanted to do and should do. Watson v. State, 658 So.2d 118 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Ricardo v. State, 608 So.2d 93 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). The scoresheet should be redone and sentencing must be redone. On remand the court cannot depart…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ricardo v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
  2. Watson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hunter v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API