Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed June 25, 2025.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D23-1404 Lower Tribunal No. F17-2927 ________________

Calvin Essix, Appellant, vs. The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ramiro C.

Areces, Judge.

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.

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

PER CURIAM.

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”).