CRAIG HARTH, 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.
The court held that the sentence imposed exceeded the recommended guidelines and the restitution order was entered without jurisdiction, requiring resentencing and reconsideration of restitution.
Appellant was convicted of burglary with a battery. The trial court sentenced the appellant above the recommended guidelines and ordered restitution a…
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 Anders V. California cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.
In this Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) appeal, appellant’s counsel raises three issues. After a review of the record, we find no merit in the first issue regarding the denial of appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal and affirm appellant’s conviction for burglary with a battery without discussion. We do, however, agree with appellant’s counsel, and appellee concedes, that the trial court erred in sentencing appellant above the recommended guidelines score and in ordering restitution.
Appellant’s recommended guidelines score was between 63.9 and 106.5 months. It is clear from the transcript that the trial judge intended to sentence appellant to the maximum sentence provided for under the guidelines. The trial judge, however, sentenced appellant to nine years and seven months incarceration, which exceeds the maximum sentence allowed under the guidelines. Accordingly, appellant’s sentence is reversed and, on remand, appellant should be resen-tenced in accordance with the seoresheet to the maximum guidelines sentence of eight years and ten-and-one-half months incarceration.
Finally, we reverse the order requiring appellant to pay restitution since appellant had already filed his notice of appeal at the time the order was entered. The trial court therefore had no jurisdiction to enter the order. See Skaggs v. State, 620 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). We conclude, however, that the trial judge reserved ruling on the issue. Accordingly, on remand, the trial court may reimpose restitution. See Gatlin v. State, 618 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
FRANK and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marinelli v. State, 706 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…2d DCA 1985). This, however, does not dispose of the issue. Because Marinelli had already filed his notice of appeal at the time the court orally ordered restitution, the trial court was without jurisdiction to enter the order. See Harth v. State, 694 So. 2d 841, 841 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Skaggs v. State, 620 So. 2d 1304, 1305 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Gatlin, 618 So. 2d at 766. On remand, the trial court may reimpose restitution, provided that it has properly reserved jurisdiction to do so. See Harth, 694 So. 2d a…
-
Sanford Paul Butler v. State, 951 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…s temporarily suspended during the appeal of his convictions and sentences. See Butler, 901 So. 2d at 924. Accordingly, on remand, the postcon-viction court may reconsider the imposition of restitution amounts against Mr. Butler. See Harth v. State, 694 So. 2d 841 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. STRINGER and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Skaggs v. State, 620 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Gatlin v. State, 618 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)