MICHAEL VALIENTE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Michael Valiente appeals his conviction and life sentence. The appellate court reverses and remands due to scrivener's errors in the judgment that failed to conform to the jury verdict and an illegally imposed general life sentence that violated sentencing requirements.
The written judgment of conviction is reversed due to scrivener's errors not conforming to the jury verdict. The life sentence is reversed because it was imposed as an illegal general sentence and was imposed improper under habitual violent felony offender provisions without adequate findings and without clearly indicating the trial court exercised discretion.
[1] A judgment of conviction must conform to the jury's verdict.
[2] General sentences imposed for multiple convictions are improper.
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“there are numerous scrivener's errors with respect to the judgment of conviction in that such judgment does not conform to the jury verdict in this case”
Establishes the first basis for reversal: the written judgment failed to match the jury's actual verdict
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceValiente was convicted by jury of multiple felonies: robbery (first degree), kidnapping on five counts (life felony), and burglary of a dwelling (seco…
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 Habitual Violent Felony Offender cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant Michael Valiente appeals multiple felony convictions and a general sentence of life imprisonment which were entered against him after an adverse jury verdict. The sole points on appeal relate to the entry of the written judgment of guilt and the imposition of sentence. We agree with the defendant’s arguments, reverse the written judgment of conviction and sentence, and remand for further proceedings.
First, as conceded by the state, there are numerous scrivener’s errors with respect to the judgment of conviction in that such judgment does not conform to the jury verdict in this case. Said judgment is therefore reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter a judgment of conviction for:
Count I Robbery
First degree felony
Counts II, III, IV, V and VI
Kidnapping life felony
Count VII Burglary of a dwelling
Second degree felony
Second, as conceded by the state, the life sentence imposed below as a general sentence as to all counts on which the defendant was convicted was illegal and must be vacated. It is well settled that a separate sentence on each count for which the defendant is convicted must be imposed. Dorfman v. State, 351 So. 2d 954 (Fla.1977); Alvarez v. State, 592 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (where trial court imposed one sentence for two counts, sentence must be vacated since “[gjeneral sentences for multiple convictions are not proper.”). Beyond that, the life sentence herein was improperly imposed under the habitual violent felony offender statutory provisions [§ 775.084(l)(b), (4)(b), Fla.Stat. (1989) ] for two reasons: (a) the trial court imposed the life sentence under circumstances which do not clearly indicate that it believed that it had the discretion to impose a lesser sentence than life imprisonment, in view of the fact that the state had argued that the imposition of a life sentence was mandatory under the habitual felony offender statute, Burdick v. State, 594 So. 2d 267, 271 (Fla.1992), and (b) the trial court failed to make the necessary statutory findings in order to declare the defendant a habitual violent felony offender as defined by Section 775.084(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1989). Parker v. State, 546 So. 2d 727 (Fla.1989). Accordingly, the life sentence imposed below is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to (a) impose a separate sentence on each count for which the defendant was convicted, (b) make the required statutory findings before declaring the defendant a habitual violent felony offender, and (c) impose a sentence under Section 775.084(4)(b) which in its discretion is appropriate in this case after clearly indicating on the record that it is exercising its discretion in imposing such sentence.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gibson v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 828 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…7 So. 2d 1361, 1366 (Fla.1984); Carroll v. State, 361 So. 2d 144, 147 (Fla.1978); Dorfman, 351 So. 2d at 956-57; Durant v. State, 763 So. 2d 1157, 1158 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Cruz v. State, 674 So. 2d 802, 802-03 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Valiente v. State, 605 So. 2d 1294, 1294-95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Lewis v. State, 567 So. 2d 50, 51 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Brown v. State, 500 So. 2d 649, 650-51 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Reichman v. State, 473 So. 2d 1324, 1325 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The majority opinion rests on a misreading…
-
Vanderbilt Hooks v. State, 613 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…ently intended to cover all three counts for which the defendant was convicted. This general sentence must be vacated and, upon remand, the trial court should enter individual sentences for each of the three separate offenses. See Valiente v. State, 605 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Second, by virtue of having entered a general sentence to cover all three offenses, the trial court appears to have sentenced the defendant to a sentence of 40 years in connection with Count III, which relates to the offense of…
Authorities Cited
- Burdick v. State, 594 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1992)
- Dorfman v. State, 351 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1977)
- Timmie Lewis Parker v. State, 546 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 1989)
- Alvarez v. State, 592 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)