Marshall v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Clarence Marshall, convicted of escape, contends on appeal that the addition of twelve points to his sentencing guidelines scoresheet for legal constraint pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(6) was erroneous because such constraint is an essential element of the offense for which he was convicted. See Sullivan v. State, 553 So.2d 348 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); State v. Chenault, 543 So.2d 1314 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Brown v. State, 502 So.2d 1293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). See also, Miller v. State, 549 So.2d 1106, 1109 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).
We need not resolve this question, however,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mays v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1988
- Miller v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
- Brown v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
- State v. ChenaultDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
- Sullivan v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
3Cited by1 opinion
- Jones v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992