ESSIX v. STATE (2025)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Calvin ESSIX, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D23-1404

Decided: June 25, 2025

Before LOGUE, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and MILLER, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jennifer Thornton, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Yolande M. Samerson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. See § 775.084(4)(h), Fla. Stat. (“A sentence imposed under this section [providing enhanced penalties for Habitual Violent Felony Offenders] is not subject to s. 921.002 [establishing Criminal Punishment Code scoresheets].”); Garcia v. State, 308 So. 3d 1031, 1033 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (“[T]the defendant was sentenced pursuant to the habitual felony offender statute and not the Criminal Punishment Code, making his sentencing guidelines scoresheet legally irrelevant and any miscalculations on it harmless as a matter of law.”) (internal citations omitted); Horn v. State, 775 So. 2d 1007, 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (“[W]e need not address [defendant's] claim [that there was an incorrect calculation in his sentencing guidelines scoresheet] because defendant was sentenced as a habitual offender and the guidelines scoresheet is irrelevant.”); see also McKnight v. State, 773 So. 2d 577, 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (stating that habitual offender sentences “are not subject to the sentencing guidelines”).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network