JOSEPH RAGAN
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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of Joseph Ragan's motion to correct an illegal sentence. Ragan argued his consecutive sentences for armed robbery were illegal, but the court found they did not exceed the statutory maximum.
No, the sentences were not illegal. The trial court correctly determined that Ragan's sentences did not exceed the statutory maximum punishment for armed robbery with a firearm, which was life imprisonment.
[1] A sentence does not constitute an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) when it does not exceed the statutory maximum punishment available fo…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“The trial court determined that Ragan’s sentences were not illegal because the jury convicted him of armed robbery as a principal, and because when Ragan committed his offenses, armed robbery with a firearm was a first-degree felony punishable by up to life in prison.”
Explains the trial court's reasoning for denying Ragan's motion.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJoseph Ragan appealed the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, asserting his consecutive forty-five-year sentences for armed robbery w…
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 First Degree Felony cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Joseph Ragan appeals an order summarily denying his motion to correct illegal sentence filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Ragan asserted that his two, consecutive forty-five-year sentences for armed robbery were illegal and that the trial court failed to properly resentence him pursuant to this court’s mandate in Ragan v. State, 973 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). The trial court determined that Ragan’s sentences were not illegal because the jury convicted him of armed robbery as a principal, and because when Ragan committed his offenses, armed robbery with a firearm was a first-degree felony punishable by up to life in prison. Ragan’s forty-five-year sentences did not exceed the statutory maximum and thus were not illegal. Finding no error by the trial court, we affirm.
We also conclude that this appeal is frivolous. This appeal marks Ragan’s third collateral attack on his judgment and sentence in Leon County Circuit Court Case Number 1982-CF-334 since his 2008 resentencing. He appealed orders denying postconviction relief in cases 1D08-3901 and 1D11-0574. Ragan received no relief in either of these cases.
The court warns Ragan that any future filings that this court determines to be frivolous may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a prohibition against any further pro se filings in this court and a referral to the appropriate institution or facility of Florida Department of Corrections for disciplinary procedures. See § 944.279, Fla. Stat. (2021) (providing that “[a] prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal . . . or to have brought a frivolous or malicious collateral criminal proceeding . . . is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections”).
AFFIRMED. ROWE, C.J., and B.L. THOMAS and RAY, JJ., concur. _____________________________