Val v. State, 741 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Val v. State, 741 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Allen v. State (fladistctapp, 2011-09-07)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Allen v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
We find no basis in the record to support the assessment of sexual penetration points as to W.B. “[A]l-though the sentence imposed in this case falls within the permitted range of a properly prepared scoresheet, we cannot conclude with certainty that appellant’s sentence would have been the same if the trial court had used a properly prepared score-sheet.” Val v. State, 741 So.2d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Brooks v. State
Fla. · 2007 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Anderson, 905 So.2d at 118 ("Because it is essential for the trial court to have *242 the benefit of a properly calculated scoresheet when deciding upon a sentence, we agree that the would-have-been-imposed standard should apply to motions filed under rule 3.850 to correct scoresheet error."); Jones v. State, 901 So.2d 255, 258 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (reversing the denial of a motion under rule 3.800(b) alleging scoresheet error and "remand[ing] for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the inclusion of fourteen points for manslaughter on the sentencing sheet was in error, and if…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Douglas M. Williams v. State of Florida
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2025 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See State v. Anderson, 905 So. 2d 111, 118 (Fla. 2005); see also Val v. State, 741 So. 2d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (reversing for resentencing because the court could not “conclude with certainty that appellant’s sentence would have been the same if the trial court had used a properly prepared scoresheet”); Williams v. State, 720 So. 2d 590, 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (remanding for resentencing with a corrected scoresheet because “it cannot be said that the same sentence would have been imposed absent the error we here correct”); Annunziata v. State, 697 So. 2d 997, 999 (Fla. 5th …
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Anderson
Fla. · 2005 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Val v. State, 741 So.2d 1199, 1200 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (reversing for resentencing because the court could not "conclude with certainty that appellant's sentence would have been the same if the trial court had used a properly prepared scoresheet"); Williams v. State, 720 So.2d 590, 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (remanding for resentencing with a corrected scoresheet because "it cannot be said that the same sentence would have been imposed absent the error we here correct"); Annunziata v. State, 697 So.2d 997, 999 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (remanding "[b]ecause it does not appear beyond reasonabl…
Lines VAL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
98-0880.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Sep 22, 1999.
741 So. 2d 1199
Shahood.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

[*1200] Raag Singhal of The Law Offices of Kaplan & Singhal, P.A., Special Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

SHAHOOD, J.

Appellant, Lines Val, appeals his sentence, alleging that he was sentenced pursuant to an erroneously prepared scoresheet. Appellee concedes, and we agree, that under White v. State, 714 So.2d 440 (Fla.1998), it was error to include an additional 18 points for use of a firearm because a three-year mandatory minimum was already required for the attempted murder with a firearm count.

Appellee urges, however, that the error is harmless since the sentence imposed falls within the recommended range. Thus, there is no need to remand for resentencing. As we concluded in Smith v. State, 685 So.2d 979 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), although the sentence imposed in this case falls within the permitted range of a properly prepared scoresheet, we cannot conclude with certainty that appellant's sentence would have been the same if the trial court had used a properly prepared scoresheet. See also Shabazz v. State, 674 So.2d 920 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

Accordingly, we remand for resentencing based on a properly prepared scoresheet.

POLEN, J., and GLICKSTEIN, HUGH S., Senior Judge, concur.