Case ID: so2d_735/html/0572-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bennith PAUL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 99-646.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    June 16, 1999.
    Bennith Paul, in proper person.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GERSTEN and GREEN, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

As the state correctly asserts, because the trial judge was aware of the recommended sentencing guidelines and the sentences imposed for the appellant’s non-capital offenses did not exceed the recommended guidelines, the court’s failure to use a scoresheet did not constitute reversible error. See Stokes v. State, 476 So.2d 313, 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The court’s failure to use a scoresheet in this case was harmless — at best. See Hamilton v. State, 537 So.2d 194, 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Williams v. State, 529 So.2d 366, 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We therefore affirm the order denying the appellant’s motion made pursuant to rule 3.800, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Affirmed.