RICHARD J. MANUAL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Standard Of Review For Motion For New Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences for sexual battery, robbery and grand theft, as well as his conviction for armed burglary. In so doing we reject appellant’s argument that the trial court, denying appellant’s motion for new trial, applied an incorrect standard of review. See, e.g., Uprevert v. State, 507 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).
Appellant also argues that the written judgment and sentence forms entered in connection with the armed burglary conviction do not conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of sentence, and thus should be corrected. Jones v. State, 533 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We agree. The state concedes that a discrepancy exists but suggests the error most likely originates in the court reporter’s transcript of the sentencing hearing. Accordingly, our decision is without prejudice to the state to attempt to establish this fact at resentencing.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
CAMPBELL, C.J., and SCHEB and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blocker v. State, 968 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…he sentencing hearing has resulted in a remand to the trial court to determine whether the written sentence or the transcript reflected the true oral pronouncement. See, e.g., Enchautegui v. State, 749 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Manual v. State, 547 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Gonzales v. State, 488 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), disapproved of on other grounds in Frey v. State, 708 So. 2d 918, 920 n. 3 (Fla.1998); Robinson v. State, 407 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). It is not so obvious, however,…
-
Ernestor Enchautegui v. State, 749 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…tion by the trial court. Id. Here, the State does not concede error. Therefore, this cause must be remanded to the trial court to clarify the sentences imposed and to enter such corrected sentencing orders as may be appropriate. See Manual v. State, 547 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (holding that where the written judgment and sentence do not conform to the oral pronouncement, on remand, the State may attempt to establish that the error was caused by the court reporter). Enchautegui’s judgments and sentences…
-
Cunningham v. State, 818 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…order is in error, remand is appropriate for the trial court to make a factual determination to resolve the conflict between the written order and the oral pronouncement. Enchautegui v. State, 749 So. 2d 550, 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Manual v. State, 547 So. 2d 726, 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). We conclude that remand is appropriate in order that the trial court may resolve the discrepancy. Accordingly, we reverse the sentence and remand with directions for the trial court to resolve the conflict between the writ…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Henri Uprevert v. State, 507 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Thaddeus D. Jones v. State, 533 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)