RUBEN SANTANA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Right To Be Present At Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ruben Santana filed a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Villery v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission, 396 So. 2d 1107 (Fla.1980). The trial court granted the motion and, without the defendant’s being present, resentenced Santana to five years in the state penitentiary, a sentence that was at variance with Santana’s plea agreement. The state candidly and appropriately acknowledges the compound error, see State v. Scott, 439 So. 2d 219 (Fla.1983) (defendant has right to be present except in the most exceptional cases); Forbert v. State, 437 So. 2d 1079 (Fla.1983) (defendant should be permitted to withdraw a guilty plea if sentence imposed is not contemplated by plea agreement).
Accordingly, in light of the foregoing authorities, we remand to the trial court with directions to vacate the sentence of five years and to resentence the defendant.
Remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Whitchard v. State, 459 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…llowing cases in support of his contention that the initial sentence should be vacated: Forbert v. State, 437 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1983); Brod v. State, 437 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1983); Chaney v. State, 452 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Santana v. State, 442 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).…
-
Chaney v. State, 452 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…pportunity to withdraw his plea of guilty. 437 So. 2d at 154. Since the Supreme Court’s decisions in Forbert and Brod, a case reached the Third District Court of Appeal in a posture simi [*1150] lar to that of the case at bar. In Santana v. State, 442 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), the defendant moved to correct his sentence pursuant to Villery. The trial court granted the motion and resentenced defendant to a sentence of incarceration longer than the plea bargain called for. The Third District vacated the…
-
Williamson v. Williamson, 478 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…uired by section 49.08(4), Florida Statutes (1983), thereby denying appellee procedural due process and depriving the trial court of perfected subject matter jurisdiction. Whigham v. Whigham, 464 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Stimpson v. Stimpson, 442 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Stock v. Stock, 410 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Villery v. The Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 396 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 1980)
- State v. Scott, 439 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1983)
- Forbert v. State, 437 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1983)