YOU MAKE THE CALL!

He’s gone and nothin’s gonna bring him back …

Does an inaccurate scoresheet make a difference prior to sentencing?

Do cases get scrutinized by lawyers and judges in the run-up to trial in part based on the sentencing points?

Do Defendants make decisions as to whether to accept a plea, plea open, or go to trial, based on what the State or judge or their lawyer tells them they’re facing?

From the recent Sun Sentinel article about John Longo, “72-year-old convict’s lawyer tried to warn a judge his health couldn’t handle jail. The defendant was dead in less than a day“:

It was not Longo’s first brush with the law. In 1987 he was convicted of 18 counts of grand theft. Records show other convictions for burglary and fraud, the most recent in 2004. All those convictions factored into his criminal history to determine a sentencing recommendation known as a “score.” The higher a defendant’s score, the more time he could be expected to serve in prison for a crime. (emphasis added)

Longo’s score, factoring in his prior convictions, would have resulted in a minimum sentence of 62 months, or a little over five years. Sentencing had not been scheduled, but would likely have taken place in late March or early April.

The problem, of course, is the ailing Longo didn’t seem to score anywhere near the 62.8 months at the bottom of the guidelines as alleged by the SAO in this scoresheet, filed the day before Longo died in custody after the jury found him guilty of an offense that carried 21 months at the bottom.

His priors on the scoresheet appear to be too old to score, meaning Longo could have approached resolving his case in much different fashion over the forty-two months he was in the community when he was healthier, after initially posting bond in July of 2018.

Did Longo’s inaccurate scoresheet make a difference?

Could it be a factor in his unexpected death?

YOU MAKE THE CALL!

_____________________________________________________________________________

Friday, March 4, 2022 – Email:

JAABLOG:

(C)an I please have a clean version of the attached scoresheet in the John Longo case? The attached, filed version is hard to read as far as the last few entries as to the dates and case numbers.

My questions: did Mr. Longo have any interaction with the criminal justice system within ten years of his 2018 case? If not, is the filed scoresheet inaccurate, as all the listed priors would not have been scoreable?

An admittedly cursory view of the scoresheet filed on the case does not seem to indicate the priors were scoreable, although as I stated, the last couple of entries are hard to read.

Monday, March 7th, 2022 – Emails:

SAO PIO:

Checked with the prosecutor who said the certified dispositions showed there had been contact with the criminal justice system in the prior 10 years but, as you know, the sentencing had not taken place yet and the decision on whether or not to remand upon guilty verdict is a different process. With the jury finding him guilty of a first-degree felony, he scored mandatory prison regardless of the prior criminal record. Let me know if you still want the scoresheet.

JAABLOG:

Please advise specifically what contact there was that would bring in the old priors to the scoresheet.

Please advise as to the contacts within 10 years.

SAO PIO:

Checked with the prosecutor who said the certified dispositions showed he was sentenced to five years of probation in 2006 for the insurance fraud case but, as you know, the sentencing had not taken place yet and the decision to remand upon guilty verdict is a different processThe jury found him guilty of a first-degree felony and he scored prison regardless of the prior criminal record. She recalculated the scoresheet without all the prior convictions and bottom of the guidelines was 21 months. Again, he had not been sentenced – he was taken into custody after jury found him guilty of grand theft of $50,000 or more from a person aged 65 or older (victims were in their 80s at time of trial).

JAABLOG:

Ok, what is the 2006 insurance fraud case number, please?

I see a supervision that Judge Holmes terminated in Dec 2006 on 04013063CF10A.

Please advise which case you are referring to that would have brought all the priors in.

SAO PIO:

You are saying it would have brought in all the priors, he had not been sentenced yet. There was discussion of his record in preparation for whether he would testify, the prosecutor said. Checked with the prosecutor who said the certified dispositions showed he was sentenced to five years of probation in 2006 for the 2004 insurance fraud case but, as you know, the sentencing had not taken place yet and the decision to remand upon guilty verdict is a different process. The jury found him guilty of a first-degree felony and he scored prison regardless of the prior criminal record. She recalculated the scoresheet without all the prior convictions and bottom of the guidelines was 21 months. Again, he had not been sentenced – he was taken into custody after jury found him guilty of grand theft of $50,000 or more from a person aged 65 or older (victims were in their 80s at time of trial).

JAABLOG: (emphasis added)

I’m confused … the 04-013063-CF10A … if that’s what we’re talking about, it says probation terminated in December 2006, twelve (12) years before the 2018 incident.

Am I incorrect?

If there’s another case that he got five (5) years probation on, please advise. The problem is Odyssey says “File Order Granting Def Motion To Terminate Probation” on 12/20/06.

Is there another case, or was he clearly done with the system before the 2018 case on December 20, 2006?

SAO PIO:

As you know, the sentencing had not taken place yet and the decision to remand upon guilty verdict is a different process to sentencing – though the state did not request or oppose his remand. The jury found him guilty of a first-degree felony and he scored prison regardless of the prior criminal record. In response to your theoretical question today about the sentencing that had not yet taken place, the prosecutor said she calculated the score without the 30 prior certified convictions and bottom of the guidelines was 21 months. Again, he had not been sentenced – he was taken into custody after jury found him guilty of grand theft of $50,000 or more from a person aged 65 or older (victims were in their 80s at time of trial). The state attorney’s office can’t speak for the defense attorney or the judge.

JAABLOG: (emphasis added)

Again, when did she do a new scoresheet, since it now seems abundantly clear that the scoresheet filed in Odyssey is incorrect.

Did she do it today, or some time after his death? Or did she do it prior to his death?

SAO PIO:

(I)f you read the response it contains the answers to your questions. Please quote the entire paragraph if you write something. Your public records request for the scoresheet that is filed on the clerk’s office website will be filled as soon as our public records staff can respond:

As you know, the sentencing had not taken place yet and the decision to remand upon guilty verdict is a different process to sentencing – though the state did not request or oppose his remand. The jury found him guilty of a first-degree felony and he scored prison regardless of the prior criminal record. In response to your theoretical question today about the sentencing that had not yet taken place, the prosecutor said she calculated the score without the 30 prior certified convictions and bottom of the guidelines was 21 months. Again, he had not been sentenced – he was taken into custody after jury found him guilty of grand theft of $50,000 or more from a person aged 65 or older (victims were in their 80s at time of trial). The state attorney’s office can’t speak for the defense attorney or the judge.

JAABLOG: (emphasis added)

OK, so to be clear, the way I read it, she did the new scoresheet in response to my theoretical question today, which means Judge Bailey and defense counsel believe to this day he scored 62.85 months at the bottom, and that the scoresheet filed with the Clerk and the Court is incorrect because his accurate score is 21 months at the bottom.

If I am incorrect on any of this, please let me know immediately.

SAO PIO:

Just please quote precisely what was written to you and don’t paraphrase what the prosecutor’s response is. You are of course free to write your opinion or theories but please don’t paraphrase the response from the prosecutor or state attorney’s office.

Please quote the entire paragraph if you write something. Your public records request for the scoresheet that is filed on the clerk’s office website will be filled as soon as our public records staff can respond:

As you know, the sentencing had not taken place yet and the decision to remand upon guilty verdict is a different process to sentencing – though the state did not request or oppose his remand. The jury found him guilty of a first-degree felony and he scored prison regardless of the prior criminal record. In response to your theoretical question today about the sentencing that had not yet taken place, the prosecutor said she calculated the score without the 30 prior certified convictions and bottom of the guidelines was 21 months. Again, he had not been sentenced – he was taken into custody after the jury found him guilty of grand theft of $50,000 or more from a person aged 65 or older (victims were in their 80s at time of trial). The state attorney’s office can’t speak for the defense attorney or the judge.

JAABLOG: (emphasis added)

The concern at this point: why can’t you just answer the questions directly?

I know the SAO’s position, I know he still scored out. But obviously a judge and defense counsel and Defendant (now deceased), would have possibly looked at everything a little differently if they’d known the bottom was literally one third of the score put forth by the SAO.

Therefore, one last time: did the Defendant, the judge, and defense counsel believe he scored 62.85 at the bottom, and why was he scored inaccurately, or is it the SAO’s position that he was accurately scored, despite not being able to point to a specific case or sentence that would have implicated Mr. Longo in the criminal justice system within ten years of the 2018 incident?

SAO PIO:

The scoresheet is irrelevant to the issue of remand. The law on post-trial release states that in no case shall bail be granted if the defendant has previously been convicted of a felony – he was not legally entitled to release because he had just been found guilty of a first-degree felony and the judge was aware of his numerous prior felony convictions (in excess of the 30 cited below) because they were discussed in court regarding the correct number if he planned to testify.

JAABLOG: (emphasis added)

Again, I am not asking about the remand issue.

I am only asking about the scoresheet.

SAO PIO:

This is the quote from our office:

The scoresheet is irrelevant to the issue of remand. The law on post-trial release states that in no case shall bail be granted if the defendant has previously been convicted of a felony – he was not legally entitled to release because he had just been found guilty of a first-degree felony and the judge was aware of his numerous prior felony convictions (in excess of the 30 cited below) because they were discussed in court regarding the correct number if he planned to testify.

_________________________________________________________________________