Case ID: so2d_717/html/0521-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. WELLS, Justice,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

George Anthony SCOTT, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
    No. 91738.
    Supreme Court of Florida.
    July 16, 1998.
    Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Assistant Public Defender, Chief, Appellate Intake Division, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, for Petitioner.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, James W. Rogers, Tallahassee Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals, and Edward C. Hill, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

We have for review the decision in Scott v. State, 700 So.2d 470 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), which the district court certified to be in conflict with the opinions in State v. Walton, 693 So.2d 135 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), and Galloway v. State, 680 So.2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), concerning the issue of whether additional sentencing points for carrying or possessing a firearm during the commission of a crime may be added to a defendant’s sentencing score where the defendant is convicted of carrying a concealed weapon or possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

Recently, we resolved this conflict in White v. State, 714 So.2d 440, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S 311 (Fla.1998), wherein we held that it is error for a trial court to assess additional sentencing points for possessing a firearm where the sole underlying crime is carrying a concealed firearm or possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. In other words, we held that rule 3.702(d)(12) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and section 921.0014, Florida Statutes (1993), do not contemplate the addition of sentencing points for carrying or possessing a firearm where the carrying or possession of a firearm is the essential element of the underlying offense. In so holding, we approved the Fourth District’s opinion in Galloway.

Therefore, we quash the decision below in accordance with our opinion in White.

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

WELLS, J., dissents with an opinion.

WELLS, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinions in Asbell v. State, 715 So.2d 258 (Fla.1998); and White v. State, 714 So.2d 440, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S311 (Fla. 1998).