TRACI GROSVENOR
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Traci Grosvenor appealed the postconviction court's denial of her motions to correct her judgment and sentence following a prior appellate decision that had remanded for correction of her Count III sentence. The court reversed and remanded, finding that the postconviction court had erroneously amended Grosvenor's sentences on Counts I and II beyond the scope of the prior remand order.
The court reversed and remanded as to Counts I and II, finding that the postconviction court erroneously amended those sentences beyond the scope of the prior remand order and that such amendments constituted scrivener's errors. The court affirmed the postconviction court's denial of Grosvenor's additional substantive challenge to Counts I and II.
[1] A postconviction court may correct scrivener's errors in a judgment and sentence.
[2] A court may not amend sentences on counts other than those specifically directed for correction on remand.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We agree with Grosvenor that the postconviction court erroneously amended her sentences on Counts I and II to reflect "natural life" instead of her original sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years.”
Establishes the core error: the postconviction court exceeded the scope of the prior remand by amending sentences not covered by the remand order.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1990, Grosvenor pleaded guilty to capital first-degree murder (Count I), attempted first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer (Count II), and…
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 Scrivener'S Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Traci Grosvenor appeals the postconviction court’s denial of her motions to correct judgment and sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand for the correction of scrivener’s errors and affirm in all other respects.
In 1990, Grosvenor pled to, among other charges, capital first-degree murder (“Count I”), attempted first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer (“Count II”), and attempted first-degree murder with a firearm (“Count III”). For Counts I and II, the trial court sentenced Grosvenor to life in prison without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years, and for Count III, fifty years. The trial court ordered all sentences to run concurrently.
Grosvenor filed a motion to correct sentence under rule 3.800(a), alleging that her sentence on Count III was illegal for exceeding the statutory maximum then in effect of either life in prison or forty years. The postconviction court denied the motion, and on appeal, this Court reversed and remanded in part for Count III to be amended to reflect forty years. See Grosvenor v. State, 308 So. 3d 665 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020).
On remand, the postconviction court corrected the sentence on Count III but also amended the sentences on Counts I and II to reflect sentences of natural life. Grosvenor subsequently moved to correct the amended judgment and sentence, challenging the natural life sentence designations.
She later filed an amended motion to include an additional challenge related 2 to Counts I and II. The postconviction court denied both motions, and this appeal followed.
We agree with Grosvenor that the postconviction court erroneously amended her sentences on Counts I and II to reflect “natural life” instead of her original sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years. In our previous opinion, we directed the postconviction court to amend only the sentence for Count III. Id. at 667. Yet on remand, it also amended Counts I and II. Thus, we reverse and remand for the postconviction court to correct those designations, which we believe to be scrivener’s errors. We find no merit to Grosvenor’s additional challenge to Counts I and II.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.
COHEN, EISNAUGLE and TRAVER, JJ., concur. 3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Grosvenor v. State, 308 So. 3d 665 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021)…statutory maximum then in effect of either life in prison or forty years. The postconviction court denied the motion, and on appeal, this Court reversed and remanded in part for Count III to be amended to reflect forty years. See Grosvenor v. State, 308 So. 3d 665 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020). On remand, the postconviction court corrected the sentence on Count III but also amended the sentences on Counts I and II to reflect sentences of natural life. Grosvenor subsequently moved to correct the amended judgment and se…
Authorities Cited
- Grosvenor v. State, 308 So. 3d 665 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021)