STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT.
v.
TOMMY DALE GOLDEN, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The trial court did not err in modifying the sentence, as the hearing held within the 60-day limit effectively enlarged the time for the judge to enter the order.
After being adjudicated guilty and sentenced, Golden moved for a sentence reduction. The State initially agreed to a modification, but later withdrew …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
The record reveals that Golden was adjudicated guilty and sentenced on July 28, 1978. He appealed, and this Court issued a mandate on June 19, 1979. On June 29, 1979, Golden moved for reduction of sentence pursuant to Rule 3.800(b), Fla.R. Crim.P. Golden asserts, and the State does not deny, that on July 16, 1979 a hearing was held on the motion and the State agreed that an order modifying the sentence could be entered on September 7, 1979, a date scheduled for the trial of other charges pending against Golden. On September 7, however, the State indicated that it would no longer concur in the modification even though it acknowledged the existence of the prior understanding of the parties before the judge.
On September 9, 1979 the judge entered his order modifying the sentence of July 28 and the State appealed, relying on State v. Smith, 360 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); De La Paz v. State, 358 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1978); and State v. Mancil, 354 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). We affirm the order before us. The hearing of July 16, 1979 was within the 60-day limit. At that time the judge effectively enlarged the period of time in which he could enter the order modifying sentence. Rule 3.050, Fla. R. Crim.P. AFFIRMED.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., BOOTH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bruno Abreu v. State, 660 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1995)…GRIMES, Chief Justice. We have for review State v. Abreu, 650 So. 2d 163 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), which certified conflict with State v. Golden, 382 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), and Smith v. State, 471 So. 2d 1347 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We have [*704] jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution. Bruno Abreu was convicted of one count of armed kidnapping, two counts of a…
-
Smith v. State, 471 So. 2d 1347 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…judge effectively enlarged the time during which he could reconsider Smith’s sentence by having commenced the hearing on Smith’s timely motion within the sixty-day limit. The First District has so held under similar circumstances in State v. Golden, 382 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). In Golden, the trial judge held a hearing within the time limit set forth in Rule 3.800(b), and the state agreed that the court could enter its order modifying the defendant’s sentence at the time scheduled for the trial of othe…
-
Grosse v. State, 511 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.060. Although the result may be harsh on a pro se petitioner, there is no discretion where the court has lost jurisdiction. We have also considered Smith v. State, 471 So. 2d 1347 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), and State v. Golden, 382 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), but find them inapposite. The order of the trial court is therefore affirmed. DOWNEY, J., concurs. ANSTEAD, J., specially concurs with opinion.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Smith, 360 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- State v. Carlie Nolan Mancil, Jr., 354 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- DE LA PAZ v. State, 358 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)