YGNACIO SANCHEZ
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 defendant's convictions and sentences but remanded the case to correct a scrivener's error in the written sentence. The error involved a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement of a life sentence and the written sentence's inclusion of a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum.
Yes, the written sentence was illegal because it improperly included a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum that was not part of the oral pronouncement. The court held that the written sentence must be corrected to match the trial court's oral pronouncement of a life sentence.
[1] A trial court imposing a sentence for attempted second-degree murder with a firearm under the 10-20-Life statute may impose a mandatory minimum within the range of twenty…
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“However, we remand for a correction of a scrivener's error in his written sentence to conform with the trial court's oral pronouncement on the sentence for attempted second-degree murder with a firearm.”
This quote establishes the court's decision to remand the case for correction of the written sentence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court orally sentenced the defendant to a mandatory life sentence for attempted second-degree murder with a firearm. However, the written se…
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 Convictions and Sentences cases and more on FLexlaw
ATKINSON, Judge. Ygnacio Sanchez appeals his convictions and sentences for attempted second-degree murder with a firearm and child abuse with a firearm. We affirm his convictions and sentences without further comment. However, we remand for a correction of a scrivener's error in his written sentence to conform with the trial court's
- 2 - oral pronouncement on the sentence for attempted second-degree murder with a firearm. At sentencing, the trial court orally imposed a mandatory minimum life sentence for attempted second-degree murder with a firearm pursuant to section 775.087(2)(a)3., Florida Statutes (2015). The court made no mention of a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum to be imposed along with the life sentence.
However, the written sentence reflects a sentence of life imprisonment with a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty-five years for attempted second-degree murder. This is an illegal sentence. See Hatten v. State, 203 So. 3d 142, 146 (Fla. 2016) ("Although . . . the 10– 20–Life statute prevails over the general sentencing maximums, if the trial court chooses to impose a sentence beyond the selected mandatory minimum sentence pursuant to the 10–20–Life statute, additional statutory authority is required."); Martinez v. State, 114 So. 3d 1119, 1120 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (reversing the defendant's life sentence with a twenty-five-year minimum mandatory for attempted second-degree murder with a firearm because the sentence improperly exceeded the statutory maximum under section 775.082(3)(b)); McLeod v. State, 52 So. 3d 784, 786 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (same).
Therefore, the written sentence reflecting the illegal sentence must be corrected to conform with the trial court's oral pronouncement of the mandatory minimum life sentence under section 775.087(2)(a)3. See Mendenhall v. State, 48 So. 3d 740, 750 (Fla. 2010) ("[T]he trial court has discretion to impose a mandatory minimum within the range of twenty-five years to life . . . notwithstanding the statutory maximum of thirty years contained in section 775.082."); see also Rivera v. State, 117
- 3 - So. 3d 449, 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (affirming but remanding for correction of written sentence to conform to the oral pronouncement); Holmes v. State, 84 So. 3d 421, 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (same). Affirmed and remanded with instructions. KHOUZAM, C.J., and KELLY, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Cortez Hatten v. State, 203 So. 3d 142 (Fla. 2016)
- Newton W. McLEOD v. State, 52 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)
- Martinez v. State, 114 So. 3d 1119 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)
- Askia Jahbred Holmes v. State, 84 So. 3d 421 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)