JOHN WILLIAM MORTON, 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.
John William Morton appealed his sentence after pleading nolo contendere to aggravated assault and arson. The court reversed the written sentence for aggravated assault because it exceeded the statutory maximum for a third-degree felony, and remanded for entry of a written sentence conforming to the trial court's legal oral pronouncement.
The written sentence for aggravated assault was illegal because it exceeded the statutory maximum. However, because the trial court's oral pronouncement of a legal 5-year sentence prevails over the written order, the court reversed the written sentence and remanded for entry of a corrected written sentence conforming to the oral pronouncement.
[1] An oral sentence pronounced by a trial court prevails over a conflicting written sentence.
[2] A written sentence that does not conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement must be reversed and remanded for correction.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Because a trial court's oral pronouncement prevails over its written order, Rowland v. State, 548 So.2d 812 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), this court should simply reverse the sentence for aggravated assault, and remand for entry of a written sentence which conforms to the oral pronouncement.”
Establishes the controlling legal principle that oral pronouncements of sentence override conflicting written orders
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMorton pleaded nolo contendere to aggravated assault (a third-degree felony) and arson. The trial court orally imposed a sentence of 5 years for aggra…
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 Oral Pronouncement Vs. Written Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
John William Morton has appealed from a written sentence imposed after his plea of nolo contendere to aggravated assault and arson. We reverse only as to the written sentence imposed for aggravated assault, and remand for correction of that sentence to conform with the oral pronouncement thereof.
Morton pled nolo contendere to aggravated assault, a third-degree felony, and arson. The trial court thereafter orally imposed a sentence of 5 years for aggravated assault, and of 9 years incarceration followed by 10 years probation for arson (the propriety of the latter sentence is not at issue). However, the written sentence for aggravated assault reflected 5 years incarceration followed by 10 years probation.
Morton argues that the sentence imposed for aggravated assault is illegal, in that the total of the incarcerative and probationary terms (15 years) exceeds the 5-year statutory maximum for a third-degree felony, § 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1989). The state acknowledges that this is an illegal sentence, but points out that the trial court orally pronounced a legal sentence. Because a trial court's oral pronouncement prevails over its written order, Rowland v. State, 548 So. 2d 812 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), this court should simply reverse the sentence for aggravated assault, and remand for entry of a written sentence which conforms to the oral pronouncement.
If the trial court imposes a split sentence (a combination of state prison and probation supervision), the total sanction shall not exceed the term provided by general law. See Comment to Rule 3.701d.l2., Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Although the written sentence imposed herein for aggravated assault is illegal as contrary to this rule, the trial court orally pronounced a legal sentence for this offense which prevails over the incorrect written order. Rowland. Therefore, we reverse the written sentence imposed for aggravated assault herein, and remand for entry of a written sentence which conforms to the trial court’s oral pronouncement.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
JOANOS, C.J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.