BAKER V. STATE

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2008 Opinion filed December 17, 2008. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D07-2478 Lower Tribunal Nos. 03-3372; 05-3997 ________________ Donald Baker, Appellant, vs. The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Reemberto Diaz, Judge. Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Maria E. Lauredo, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Heidi Milan Caballero, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before SUAREZ, CORTIÃ AS, and ROTHENBERG, JJ. CORTIÃ AS, J. Donald Baker ( Defendant ) admitted to violating the terms of his probation and was sentenced to 8.2 years in prison, the minimum sentence recommended by the guideline scoresheet. Defendant timely moved for resentencing based on alleged errors in the guideline scoresheet, which the State conceded was incorrect. During the resentencing hearing, defense counsel refused to stipulate to the new scoresheet because it included convictions that were based solely on a hearsay printout. Nevertheless, the trial court accepted the newly calculated scoresheet and denied the Motion to Resentence. Where a defendant disputes prior convictions that are based only on hearsay evidence, the court must require the State to produce corroborating evidence. See Eutsey v. State, 383 So. 2d 219, 225 (Fla. 1980); Blanton v. State, 546 So. 2d 1181, 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Davis v. State, 463 So. 2d 398, 399 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In the instant case, following defense counsel s refusal to stipulate to the hearsay-based scoresheet, the trial court was required to request from the State competent corroborating evidence. It erred in not doing so. On remand, the State should have an opportunity to prove Defendant s prior convictions by corroborating, non-hearsay evidence. See Williams v. State, 545 So. 2d 302, 303-04 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Reversed and remanded. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.