Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
James Edward SCAIFE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Edward Scaife (Appellant) appeals the trial court's reclassification of his second-degree felony aggravated battery conviction, as a first-degree felony for sentencing purposes. Appellant was convicted of “aggravated battery with great bodily harm or with a firearm.” Appellant argues that the alternative manner in which the aggravated battery was charged allowed the jury to convict on a theory of aggravated battery with great bodily harm or aggravated battery with a firearm and, under such circumstances, reclassification is improper. We agree and reverse.
Reclassification of an aggravated battery conviction from a second-degree felony to a first-degree felony is error when it is unclear from the verdict form whether a defendant was found guilty of aggravated battery causing great bodily harm, for which reclassification is available, or aggravated battery with the use of a firearm, for which reclassification is not available because use of a firearm is an essential element of the offense. See Montgomery v. State, 704 So.2d 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); McNeal v. State, 653 So.2d 1122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). In the case at bar, the jury's verdict provided that Appellant was: “Guilty of aggravated battery with great bodily harm or with a firearm.” Because it is unclear from the verdict form whether the jury convicted Appellant of aggravated battery with use of a firearm, or aggravated battery with great bodily harm, reclassification was error. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing under a corrected sentencing guidelines scoresheet. Upon resentencing, as agreed by the parties in their briefs, Appellant should receive a three-year minimum mandatory sentence for the use of a firearm.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BROWNING, J.
MINER and BENTON, JJ., CONCUR.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 1D99-30.
Decided: May 17, 2000
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida,First District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)