Barajas v. State (974 So. 2d 542, 2008)

PER CURIAM.

Jose Luis Barajas appeals the denial of his rule 3.850 motion. At a hearing on some of his claims, the state agreed with Barajas that his conviction for count V should be vacated based on a double jeopardy violation. The trial court accepted the concession and recognized that this would require a new sentencing hearing with a corrected scoresheet. The written order vacated the conviction and sentence on count V, but Barajas was not re-sentenced on the remaining charges. On appeal, the state agrees that re-sentencing is required. See State v. Anderson, 905 So.2d 111 (Fla.2005) (holding that the proper test for determining whether re-sentencing is required as a result of a scoresheet error raised in a 3.850 motion is whether the record conclusively shows the same sentence would have been imposed with a correct scoresheet); Leyva v. State, 929 So.2d 1210 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Accordingly, we reverse the circuit court’s order and remand for the court to re-sentence Barajas on the remaining charges with a corrected scoresheet.

We affirm the denial of Barajas’ remaining claims.

STONE, FARMER and MAY, JJ., concur.