DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MICHAEL KEVIN WOODS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-3778

[March 25, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Martin County; Lawrence M. Mirman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

432017CF001085A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Stacey Kime, Assistant Public 

Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Anesha Worthy, 

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

WALSH, LISA S., Associate Judge.

Michael Kevin Woods (“Defendant”) appeals his five-year prison 

sentence imposed following his no contest plea to theft and burglary

charges. Defendant argues on appeal that the State presented insufficient 

proof of a prior conviction at his sentencing hearing. We hold that merely 

objecting to the sufficiency of proof of a prior offense on a scoresheet, 

rather than disputing its accuracy or truth, does not obligate the State to 

introduce corroborating evidence of the conviction. Moreover, although 

not required to do so, the State introduced competent evidence of a 

certified conviction corroborating the prior offense. Therefore, we affirm 

the trial court’s sentence.

Background

At sentencing, the trial court reviewed a pre-sentence investigation 

report, Defendant’s sentencing memorandum, and the sentencing 

scoresheet. Defendant’s sentencing scoresheet listed a prior offense for 

burglary. The pre-sentence investigation report listed a 1984 prior 
2

conviction for burglary and larceny for Michael Woods in “Homdel, New 

Jersey, Monmouth County.” The State also admitted a certified prior 

conviction for burglary in Monmouth County, New Jersey. Defendant

objected to the competency and sufficiency of proof of the prior offense but 

did not contest its truth. Nor did the defense present any evidence refuting 

the New Jersey conviction. The State pointed out that Defendant’s own 

sentencing memorandum mentioned that he was from New Jersey. 

Defendant was sentenced to five years in prison, prompting this appeal.

On appeal, Defendant argues that his sentencing scoresheet incorrectly 

added prior offense points for a 1984 burglary conviction in Monmouth 

County, New Jersey. He maintains that, had the scoresheet omitted this 

offense, his sentencing score would have permitted a range between any 

nonstate prison sanction up to a five-year prison term. Including the 

contested prior offense, however, resulted in a mandatory prison term.

Analysis

We review de novo alleged errors contesting the accuracy of a 

sentencing scoresheet. Moore v. State, 268 So. 3d 792, 794 (Fla. 4th DCA 

2019).

Defendant argues that the State produced insufficient proof 

corroborating the prior New Jersey burglary offense. However, at his 

sentencing hearing, he merely objected that the State’s proof of identity 

was inadequate, not that the prior offense was untrue. “[W]here the 

objection to prior convictions on a rap sheet is predicated solely on 

hearsay, with no dispute as to their truth, the state need not produce 

corroborating evidence.” Jennings v. State, 595 So. 2d 251, 252 (Fla. 1st 

DCA 1992); see also Rodriguez v. State, 650 So. 2d 1111, 1112 (Fla. 2d 

DCA 1995) (stating that an objection to prior record predicated solely on 

hearsay does not require corroboration by the State); Telfort v. State, 616 

So. 2d 1222, 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (same); Banks v. State, 610 So. 2d 

514, 517 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (same).

However, if a defendant contests the truth of the prior conviction, then 

the State is required to corroborate the offense by competent evidence. See 

Harp v. State, 715 So. 2d 377, 378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (“[W]hen a 

defendant denies under oath that he is the person named in certified 

copies of judgments of conviction, the State has the burden of proving, by 

other corroborating evidence, that those records refer to the defendant 

before the Court.”); Lyons v. State, 823 So. 2d 250, 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 

2002) (holding that the State has the burden of producing competent 

evidence of a disputed conviction).
3

Here, though not required to do so, the State introduced the 1984 

certified conviction of the prior offense from Monmouth County Superior 

Court. “Proper competent corroborating evidence includes certified copies 

of the convictions and ‘original court records.’” Taulbee v. State, 277 So. 

3d 1133, 1135 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (quoting Hughes v. State, 139 So. 3d 

477, 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)). Thus, even if required to corroborate the 

prior offense, the State offered sufficient proof.

Moreover, the pre-sentence investigation report reflected that 

Defendant was arrested on the contested offense by “Homdel PD” in 

Monmouth County and attended “Homedale” high school a few years 

before the offense was committed. His own sentencing memorandum 

stated that he attended his last two years of high school at “Hometown” 

New Jersey. “Hometown,” “Homdel” and “Homedale” do not exist, but 

Holmdel lies in Monmouth County, New Jersey. As Defendant offered 

nothing to rebut the State’s evidence and did not contest the truth of his 

prior conviction, we find no error.

Defendant also challenges on hearsay grounds the trial court’s reliance 

upon the contents of an NCIC report that was never introduced in 

evidence. Because the State introduced a certified copy of the prior 

conviction, the trial court’s reference to hearsay contained within an NCIC 

report is harmless.

Affirmed.

WARNER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.