RONALD C. WHITE, 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.
The court held that a sentence exceeding the statutory maximum for a first-degree felony is illegal and must be corrected, while other lawful sentences remain valid.
[1] A sentence exceeding the statutory maximum for a felony of the first degree is an illegal sentence.
[2] An illegal sentence on one count does not necessarily invalidate lawful sentences on other counts.
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 intelligenceDefendant was sentenced to fifty years imprisonment for conspiracy to commit first-degree murder, an offense with a maximum sentence of thirty years. …
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
PER CURIAM.
Ronald C. White appeals from an order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence. Based on the State’s partial confession of error, we reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand for further proceedings.
Pursuant to a negotiated plea of nolo contendere, defendant was sentenced to fifty years imprisonment on count two, conspiracy to commit first degree murder. As the State correctly concedes, that offense is a felony of the first degree; punishment for a felony of the first degree may not exceed thirty years imprisonment. Accordingly, we reverse as to that sentence only, and remand for the correction of the sentence on count two.
We affirm the remaining sentences, as the unlawful sentence on count two does not impact upon the remaining legal sentences. See Davis v. Wainwright, 408 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (improper mitigation of sentence as to one count did not taint sentences as to other counts). The remaining sentences were lawfully entered pursuant to the plea agreement. See Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1988) (plea bargain sufficient basis for departure sentence); Bush v. State, 596 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 604 So. 2d 486 (Fla.1992) (same).
Finally, the trial court properly rejected defendant’s claim that his conviction and sentences violated his right to be free from double jeopardy. Those claims should have been raised in defendant’s two prior motions for posteonvietion relief under Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.850, not in a motion to correct an illegal sentence. See Plowman v. State, 586 So. 2d 454 (Fla.2d DCA 1991) (double jeopardy claim cannot be raised in motion to correct illegal sentence). Moreover, by entering into a bargained-for plea agreement, defendant waived his right to attack his conviction and sentences on double jeopardy grounds. Novaton v. State, 634 So. 2d 607 (Fla.1994); Bryant v. State, 644 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded for correction as to the sentence on count two only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Skidmore v. State, 688 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…f the original charges and take him to trial. Jolly v. State, 392 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Furthermore, the double jeopardy claims may not be raised by a 3.800 motion, see Hopping v. State, 674 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); White v. State, 644 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), as they are cut off by the entry of the plea. Salazar v. State, 675 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Finding no error, we affirm. Affirmed. . The defendant was charged with burglary of a structure, robbery, two counts of aggra…
-
Eniel Planas v. State, 212 So. 3d 473 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Durm v. State, 139 So. 3d 370 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014); White v. State, 644 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Coughlin v. State, 932 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).…
-
Durm v. State, 139 So. 3d 370 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…reality it seeks to vacate his conviction1 as barred by double jeopardy. A double jeopardy challenge to a conviction must be brought pursuant to rule 3.850, rather than rule 3.800(a). Lopez v. State, 2 So. 3d 1057 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); White v. State, 644 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Plowman v. State, 586 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Ferenc v. Sate, 563 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). While we therefore affirm the lower court’s order, which was right for the wrong reason, see Irving v. State, 627 So. 2d 92…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Novaton v. State, 634 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 1994)
- THE Florida BAR v. Mullins, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla. 1988)
- Plowman v. State, 586 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Bryant v. State, 644 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
- Davis v. Louie L. Wainwright, 408 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Bush v. State, 596 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)