ULYSSES TAYLOR, JR.
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 denial of a motion for postconviction relief but remanded the case to correct a scrivener's error in the judgment and sentence. The court found that while the lower court denied relief based on the appellant being sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender (PRR) on both counts, the record showed he was only sentenced as a PRR on one count.
The court held that the written sentence contained a scrivener's error regarding the PRR designation. The oral pronouncement of the sentence controls, and Taylor was only sentenced as a PRR on count two.
[1] Battery on a law enforcement officer does not qualify as a forcible felony for purposes of prison releasee reoffender sentencing.
[2] When a trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence conflicts with the written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls and the written judgment must be corrected to con…
Previewing 2 of 2 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 affirm the denial of his claims without further comment, but we remand with a direction to the postconviction court to correct a scrivener's error in the judgment and sentence.”
Establishes the dual outcome of the appeal: affirming the denial of relief but remanding for correction of an error.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceUlysses Taylor, Jr. appealed the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief, arguing his sentences were illegal. The lower court denied re…
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 Forcible Felony cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Highlands County; Peter F. Estrada, Judge. Ulysses Taylor, Jr., pro se. NORTHCUTT, Judge. Ulysses Taylor, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief in which he claimed that his sentences are illegal. We affirm the denial of his claims without further comment, but we remand with a direction to the postconviction court to correct a scrivener's error in the judgment and sentence. When denying the motion, the postconviction court found that Taylor's sentences were legal because he was sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender (PRR) on both counts: battery on a law enforcement officer (count one) and resisting an officer
- 2 - with violence (count two).
However, attached to the court's order are previous orders indicating that Taylor was not sentenced as a PRR on count one. Indeed, if Taylor had been sentenced as a PRR on count one, his sentence would be illegal because battery on a law enforcement officer is not a crime for which a defendant can be sentenced as a PRR. See Walker v. State, 965 So. 2d 1281, 1283 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that battery on a law enforcement officer is not a forcible felony that qualifies for PRR sentencing).
The sentencing transcript reflects that the trial court sentenced Taylor as a PRR on count two only. But the written sentence is ambiguous as to whether Taylor was sentenced as a PRR on count one; it simply states on the last page that "Defendant sentenced as a Prison Releasee Reoffender." The sentence imposed in an oral pronouncement prevails over the written sentence. See Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600, 603 (Fla. 2007) ("This [c]ourt has held that a court's oral pronouncement of a sentence controls over the written sentencing document.").
Therefore, we remand for correction of the judgment and sentence to reflect that Taylor was sentenced as a PRR on count two only. See Hetman v. State, 185 So. 3d 644, 644 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (directing trial court to remove erroneous PRR designations in conformity with the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentences); see also Herrera v. State, 276 So. 3d 60, 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (affirming an order denying relief but remanding to correct a scrivener's error in the judgment).
Affirmed and remanded with instructions. BLACK and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Walker v. State, 965 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)
- Herrera v. State, 263 So. 3d 1118 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)
- Hetman v. State, 185 So. 3d 644 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)