Legal Opinion

Housen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 13, 1994No. 93-1932PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We affirm appellant’s conviction, but reverse his sentence and remand for resentenc-ing.

Appellant’s offense date was April 13, 1988. His sentencing guidelines scoresheet indicated a recommended sentencing range of twelve to seventeen years. The trial court, however, erroneously relied upon that portion of the scoresheet which reflected a “permitted range” of seven to twenty-two years and sentenced appellant to twenty year’s incarceration and two years probation.

The “permitted range” concept does not apply to offenses committed prior to its effective date of July 1, 1988. Sequoia v. State, 624…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. BetancourtSupreme Court of Florida · 1989
  2. Smith v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  3. Sequoia v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Madrigal v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API