MICHAEL MASON, 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.
Mason was convicted of one count of racketeering and seven counts of organized fraud. The appellate court affirmed the convictions but remanded for correction of written probation orders that did not conform to the trial court's oral pronouncements regarding sentence terms.
The convictions are affirmed. The case is remanded because the written probation orders fail to conform to the trial court's oral pronouncements regarding sentence length and contain errors regarding the method of plea and felony degree classifications.
[1] A defendant has not been harmed by a sentence and therefore has not raised an appealable issue when the sentence imposed is not a departure sentence, even if the trial co…
[2] A written judgment or order must conform to the sentence pronounced by the trial court in open court.
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“We affirm appellant's convictions of one count of racketeering under section 895.03(3), Florida Statutes, and of seven counts of organized fraud under sections 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes”
The court's affirmation of the core convictions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMason was convicted by jury of one count of racketeering under Florida Statutes section 895.03(3) and seven counts of organized fraud under section 81…
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 Organized Fraud cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s convictions of one count of racketeering under section 895.03(3), Florida Statutes, and of seven counts of organized fraud under sections 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes, and find only two matters merit brief discussion.
First, we do not need to decide if the trial court erred regarding its findings as to reasons to depart from the sentencing guidelines as the sentence imposed is not a departure sentence. Appellant has not been harmed by the sentence, and may never be, and therefore has not raised an appealable issue.
Second, we note that the written orders placing appellant on probation for the organized fraud counts do not conform to the sentence the trial court pronounced in open court, and thus remand for conformation thereof. Specifically, the trial court orally announced that appellant would be on probation for 30 years on counts 2 through 7, and for five years on count 8. The documents entitled Judgment, Sentence and Order Placing Defendant on Probation During a Portion of Sentence state that appellant pleaded nolo contendere to the charges, whereas he was found guilty by a jury; state that organized fraud is a second-degree felony, while in fact six of those counts were first-degree felonies; and state that the probation imposed is “THREE (30) YEARS ALL COUNTS TO RUN CONCURRENT AND CONCURRENT TO COUNT 1,” rather than what was announced in open court, which was 30 years probation on counts 2 through 7 and five years probation on count 8.
Therefore, we remand so that the written orders placing appellant on probation may be conformed to the trial court’s oral pronouncements.
MINER, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.