WALTER WILLIAMS, 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.
Walter Williams appealed his convictions and sentences for attempted first degree murder, kidnapping, and aggravated child abuse, challenging whether his sentence for attempted murder exceeded the statutory maximum and whether the written kidnapping sentence conformed to the trial court's oral pronouncement. The appellate court affirmed the convictions but vacated and remanded the sentences for attempted murder and kidnapping for correction.
The attempted murder sentence exceeded the statutory maximum and must be reduced to thirty years. The trial court must clarify on remand whether the failure to include the fifteen-year probationary term in the written kidnapping sentence was inadvertent or reflected a change from the oral pronouncement.
[1] A sentence for attempted first-degree murder cannot exceed the statutory maximum of thirty years imprisonment.
[2] A written sentence must conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence.
Previewing 2 of 4 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 state correctly concedes that the sentence for the attempted murder exceeds the statutory thirty-year maximum”
Establishes that the state acknowledged the attempted murder sentence was legally excessive under Florida statutes.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Williams pled no contest to concurrent forty-year prison terms followed by fifteen years' probation for attempted murder and kidnapping, and…
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 Statutory Maximum Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges his judgments and sentences for attempted first degree murder, kidnapping and aggravated child abuse. He raises two points: (1) that his sentence for attempted murder exceeds the statutory maximum; and (2) that the written sentence for the kidnapping should be conformed to the trial court’s oral pronouncement at the plea and sentencing hearing.
Appellant pled no contest to concurrent forty-year prison terms followed by fifteen years’ probation for the attempted murder and kidnapping and to a fifteen-year sentence on aggravated child abuse. The state correctly concedes that the sentence for the attempted murder exceeds the statutory thirty-year maximum. Sections 775.082(3)(b), 777.04(4)(a), 782.04(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989). The state, however, does not concede error in the written sentence for kidnapping.
The written sentence on the kidnapping imposes forty years in prison to be followed by fifteen years’ probation. Appellant contends the written sentence fails to conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence at the end of the hearing when the court failed to again mention the fifteen-year probationary term on the kidnapping charge. The state disagrees. It points out that the court made it clear to appellant while accepting the plea that he would be sentenced to forty years in prison followed by fifteen years’ probation on both the kidnapping charge and the attempted murder. On remand the trial court should clarify whether the written sentence correctly reflected his oral pronouncement of the sentence. See Harris v. State, 574 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of conviction on attempted murder, kidnapping and aggravated child abuse. We affirm the sentence on aggravated child abuse. However, we vacate appellant’s sentences on the attempted murder and kidnapping charges. On remand, the written sentence on the attempted murder should be changed to reflect a thirty-year, rather than a forty-year, prison term to be followed by fifteen years’ probation. With respect to the kidnapping sentence, the trial court on remand should clarify whether the failure to include a probationary term at the end of the sentencing hearing was inadvertent.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and RYDER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ravindranauth Sugrim v. Singletary, 622 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…PER CURIAM. We grant in part the petition for writ of habeas corpus. The state concedes, and we agree, that each of the sentences for attempted first degree murder exceeds the legal maximum. See Williams v. State, 583 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Accordingly, we grant the petition to the extent that we direct the trial court to reduce appellant’s sentences for attempted murder in accord with Williams. The petitioner need not be present when the amended sentencing orders…
Authorities Cited
- Harris v. State, 574 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)