supported the imposition of a sentence “within the range ” applicable to the charged crime and “authorized by the jury finding” that the defendant was guilty of the charged crime-even without a jury’s finding of penetration. Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 494 n. 19, 120 S.Ct. 2348. Accordingly, penetration was neither required to be found by the jury nor required to be alleged in the information. This case is controlled by the rule that where the victim injury which is the basis for the assessment of sentencing points is not an element — or the functional equivalent of an element — of the offense and thus not part of the essential facts constituting the offense charged, the victim injury need not be alleged in the information. But see Delgado v. State, 948 So.2d 883, 884 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (<HOLDING>). This view is supported by the decision in
holding failure to file statement of points is no bar to appeal holding that assessment of victim injury points was improper because the information did not allege the factual basis for the victim injury points holding statement of points in notice of appeal sufficient recognizing that the assessment of victim injury points depends on whether the victims injury was a direct result of the defendants crimes holding the harmed victim need not be the victim of the offense of conviction