You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Riggsby v. State

Citations: 696 So. 2d 1337; 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8384; 1997 WL 408750Docket: No. 95-03668

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; July 23, 1997; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Elden Riggsby appeals his conviction and sentence for one count of capital sexual battery and four counts of handling and fondling a child under sixteen. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment for the capital sexual battery, with a minimum mandatory of twenty-five years, and fifteen years for each of the four noncapital offenses, to run concurrently. Although a guidelines scoresheet is not required for capital offenses, it is mandatory for noncapital offenses. The court erred by not preparing a scoresheet for the noncapital counts. Consequently, Riggsby must be resentenced based on a properly calculated scoresheet. The appellate court affirms the conviction and sentence for the capital sexual battery but reverses and remands for resentencing on the noncapital offenses. The judgment also requires correction to reflect the minimum mandatory for the capital conviction.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation of Convictions on Appeal

Application: The appellate court upheld the conviction and sentence for the capital sexual battery charge.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirms the conviction and sentence for the capital sexual battery but reverses and remands for resentencing on the noncapital offenses.

Appellate Review of Sentencing Errors

Application: The appellate court identified a procedural error in sentencing and remanded the case for resentencing based on a properly calculated scoresheet for the noncapital offenses.

Reasoning: Consequently, Riggsby must be resentenced based on a properly calculated scoresheet.

Correction of Judgment Records

Application: The judgment requires correction to accurately reflect the minimum mandatory sentence for the capital conviction.

Reasoning: The judgment also requires correction to reflect the minimum mandatory for the capital conviction.

Sentencing Requirements for Noncapital Offenses

Application: The trial court is required to prepare a guidelines scoresheet for noncapital offenses, which was not done in this case, necessitating a resentencing.

Reasoning: Although a guidelines scoresheet is not required for capital offenses, it is mandatory for noncapital offenses. The court erred by not preparing a scoresheet for the noncapital counts.