MELVIN C. GANDY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Appellant Gandy challenged his sentences as illegal, arguing they violated principles established in Carawan v. State. The court affirmed the sentences but amended them to strike illegal "hard labor" language, finding Carawan's doctrine superseded by statute and inapplicable to post-conviction claims.
The court affirmed the sentences as legally sufficient but amended them by striking the "hard labor" language, which is not authorized by Florida law. Appellant's Carawan-based arguments were not cognizable under Rule 3.800(a) and were time-barred under Rule 3.850.
[1] A motion to correct illegal sentences under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) is not the proper vehicle for challenging convictions based on double jeopardy arg…
[2] Challenges to convictions, rather than sentences, must be pursued under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, not Rule 3.800(a).
Previewing 2 of 5 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“double jeopardy arguments raised under Carawan are really challenges to convictions, not sentences, and thus are not cognizable under Rule 3.800, but rather must be pursued via Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850”
Establishes the procedural distinction between challenges to convictions versus sentences and the proper rule under which such claims must be brought
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Gandy was convicted in 1979 of crimes arising from a single criminal episode and received sentences that included hard labor provisions. In …
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 Correction Of Illegal Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1364] ERVIN, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of a trial court order denying his pro se motion to correct certain illegal sentences arising from a single criminal episode, which we treat as one brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm the sentences with amendment.
The only point raised by appellant that warrants discussion is the application of Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1987), to appellant's multiple convictions. Not only have Carawan and its progeny been superseded by statute — see § 775.021(4), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1988), and Clark v. State, 530 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) — but our Florida Supreme Court has recently held that Carawan may not be retroactively applied to post-conviction claims. State v. Glenn, 558 So. 2d 4 (Fla.1990); State v. Pastor, 556 So. 2d 1112 (Fla.1990). Moreover, as this court recently stated in Ferenc v. State, 15 F.L.W. D938 (Fla. 1st DCA Apr. 15, 1990), double jeopardy arguments raised under Carawan are really challenges to convictions, not sentences, and thus are not cognizable under Rule 3.800, but rather must be pursued via Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.1 Appellant is time-barred, however, from seeking relief under Rule 3.850.2 Under the circumstances, appellant’s motion was properly denied.
Upon further review of appellant’s sentences, we note that each provides that appellant be “imprisoned at hard labor.” Sentences at “hard labor” are not authorized by law in Florida. Calhoun v. State, 403 So. 2d 1082, 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Therefore, those portions of the sentences relating to the “hard labor” language are stricken and the sentences, as amended, are affirmed. Alexander v. State, 404 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
AFFIRMED.
NIMMONS, J., and FORD L. THOMPSON, (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur. . For a similar distinction between 3.800(a) and 3.850 motions, see Johnson v. State, 557 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
. Rule 3.850 expressly provides that "[a]ny person whose judgment and sentence became final prior to January 1, 1985, shall have until January 1, 1987, to file a motion[.]” Although appellant’s convictions were rendered in 1979, he did not file his motion until June 15, 1989.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sanders v. State, 621 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…th DCA 1988); Richardson v. State, 523 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Wright v. State, 519 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). . But see Wheeler v. State, 344 So. 2d 244 (Fla.1977); Martin v. State, 574 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Gandy v. State, 560 So. 2d 1363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Harris v. State, 520 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 536 So. 2d 244 (Fla.1988). . See State v. Glenn, 558 So. 2d 4 (Fla.1990); Garcia v. State, 476 So. 2d 170 (Fla.1985); Owens v. State, 475 So. 2d 1238 (Fla.1985); Stat…
-
Wiley v. State, 604 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…of the sort appellant advanced in this case are challenges to convictions, not sentences, and thus are not cognizable under rule 3.800; rather, they must be pursued by rule 3.850. Ferenc v. State, 563 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Gandy v. State, 560 So. 2d 1363, 1364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); State v. Spella, 567 So. 2d 1051, 1052 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Therefore, it was properly treated as a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.850 by the trial court. As presently stated, the allegations of the motion are facially…
-
Crabtree v. State, 624 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…ed by the Legislature for armed robbery in 1975. We affirm the sentence but remand to the trial court to correct Crabtree’s judgment to reflect his conviction for a first degree felony, and to strike the condition of hard labor. See Gandy v. State, 560 So. 2d 1363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Iannucci v. State, 400 So. 2d 139 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Evans v. State, 395 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Pryor v. State, 390 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); McDonald v. State, 321 So. 2d 453, 458 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), rev. on…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dion Michael Carawan v. State, 515 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1987)
- State v. Glenn, 558 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1990)
- Calhoun v. State, 403 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Clark v. State, 530 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)
- Johnson v. State, 557 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- State v. Pastor, 556 So. 2d 1112 (Fla. 1990)
- Alexander v. State, 404 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)