
    Roy GISSENDANNER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 93-0127.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Dec. 15, 1993.
    Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Mallorye G. Cunningham, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Georgina Jimeniz-Orosa, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

We affirm the denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief without prejudice to appellant to petition the trial court to set aside his sentence because the sentencing scoresheet appears to be facially in error.

ANSTEAD and STONE, JJ., concur.

POLEN, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with opinion.

POLEN, Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree the trial court correctly denied appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief based on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. However, I would hold that appellant has already demonstrated error as to the sentencing guideline scoresheet calculations. We should reverse and remand for resen-tencing, based on a correctly scored guideline scoresheet, without requiring appellant to file yet another petition in the trial court.  