RAMON BENITEZ CRUZ, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its sentencing, as it properly corrected an unlawful sentence and jurisdiction retention order.
The defendant was convicted and sentenced, but the trial court initially imposed an unlawful sentence and retention of jurisdiction. Upon realizing th…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Retention Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reject as without merit any claim by Cruz that the trial court committed reversible error during the course of the trial upon a holding that there was overwhelming evidence to support the conviction. At the time of the sentencing the trial court imposed a 120-year sentence on Count I and erroneously (a) imposed a concurrent (sic) 120-year sentence on Count II, and (b) retained jurisdiction for one-third of 240 years, for a total of eighty years.
Upon being advised that the sentence on Count II was unlawful and that under the statute the retention order was incorrect, the trial court vacated the sentences previously imposed, imposed lawful sentences to run consecutively and retained jurisdiction for one-half of the total sentence of 125 years.1 The state concedes a clerical error was made and that the retention of jurisdiction order should be corrected to be sixty-two and one-half years instead of sixty-seven and one-half years.
It is clear from the record that the trial court’s intention was to impose a maximum sentence for the crimes involved and the court, consistent with its sentencing plan, properly corrected its sentence to be a legal sentence and has committed no sentencing error. See Goree v. State, 411 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
Affirmed as modified.
. Under the applicable law at the time the case was heard retention of jurisdiction applied to one-half of the total consecutive sentence. § 947.16(3), Fla.Stat. (1982). Presently the law again calls for retention of jurisdiction over one-third of the total consecutive sentence. § 947.16(3), Fla.Stat. (1983).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pate v. Renfroe, 715 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…tion of the appellate court to review errors allegedly committed by trial courts, not to entertain for the first time on appeal issues which the complaining party could have, and should have, but did not, present to the trial court.” Abrams v. Paul, 458 So. 2d 826, 827 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). We reject Pate’s argument that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a new trial or additur, which Pate sought on the ground that the jury finding that Pate was fifteen percent comparatively negligent was agains…
-
Torrey v. Torrey, 815 So. 2d 773 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…solve in its July 25th order summarily denying his motion to vacate. The issue is a factual one and requires the trial court to weigh the evidence and make a determination as [*776] to whether appellant received the notice. Camerota; Abrams v. Paul, 458 So. 2d 826, 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Finally, appellant contends the trial court did not make the necessary factual findings to support its orders. He argues that the trial court erred when it summarily concluded that he had the ability to pay his support arr…
-
Fogle v. State, 479 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.800(a); Cruz v. State, 458 So. 2d 826, 827 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). See also Llerana v. State, 508 F. 2d 78, 81 (5th Cir.1975) (court has a duty to correct an illegal sentence even though the defendant started serving the sentence and the corrected sentence is more onerous). RYDER, C.J., a…
Authorities Cited
- Goree v. State, 411 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)