JAMES FRANK STARK, 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 affirmed convictions for sale and possession of cocaine, affirmed the habitual offender sentence for sale, but reversed the guidelines sentence for possession due to an error in the scoresheet.
Defendant was convicted of sale and possession of cocaine. The trial court imposed a habitual offender sentence for the sale conviction and a guidelin…
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 Judgment Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Judge.
James Frank Stark appeals his convictions and sentences for sale of cocaine and possession of cocaine. We affirm his convictions. As to his sentences, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for resentencing as discussed below.
On the sale of cocaine conviction, Stark received a habitual offender sentence, which we affirm. The trial court orally imposed judgment hens for the public defender fee, court costs, and restitution/costs to the police department. In the written order of probation, however, these amounts are listed as conditions of probation. Because the trial court did not impose these amounts as conditions of probation, the written order of probation does not match the trial court’s oral pronouncements. Accordingly, we strike the conditions of probation directing payment of the above-mentioned fees and costs. The trial court shall enter the judgment liens orally announced at sentencing. We specifically affirm the amount of the lien in favor of the police department because Stark failed to timely object to this amount before the trial court. See Pardes v. State, 696 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA1997).
Additionally, we reverse the guidelines sentence imposed on the possession of cocaine conviction. Stark’s scoresheet included points for the sale of cocaine conviction. Because Stark was sentenced as a habitual offender on this offense, it was error to include the sale of cocaine on the score-sheet. See Eblin v. State, 677 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Accordingly, we reverse the guidelines sentence and remand for resentencing with a corrected scoresheet.
Convictions affirmed; sentence on the sale of cocaine conviction affirmed, certain probation conditions stricken; sentence on the possession of cocaine conviction reversed and remanded for resentencing with a corrected scoresheet.
PARKER, C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vernia Smith v. State, 100 So. 3d 253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…teen. The State concedes that the discrepancy between the written order and the oral pronouncement reflects error. We therefore remand for an entry of a written revocation order correctly reflecting the trial court’s oral ruling. See Stark v. State, 712 So. 2d 454, 455 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (finding that the written order of probation should match the trial court’s oral pronouncements); see also Reiter v. State, 674 So. 2d 189, 190-91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (finding that the “written [probation] order must be modifi…
-
Shacker v. State, 106 So. 3d 36 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)…on, however, reflected that Shacker committed all nine alleged violations. As the State concedes, the written order should correctly reflect the oral pronouncement. See Smith v. State, 100 So. 3d 258, 254 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012); see also Stark v. State, 712 So. 2d 454, 455 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Reiter v. State, 674 So. 2d 189, 190-91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded to the Court below to strike those portions of the order finding that Shacker had committed violations 1, 5, 7 and…
-
Villanueva v. State, 118 So. 3d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)…ding 1 year.”). And the State concedes error on both points. On remand, the trial court is directed to enter a written order that correctly reflects its oral pronouncements. See Smith v. State, 100 So. 3d 253, 254 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012); Stark v. State, 712 So. 2d 454, 455 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). CONCLUSION Because the condition was reasonably related to Villanueva’s rehabilitation for the crime for which he was convicted when the facts in the record are considered, we hold that the trial judge properly exercised i…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Eblin v. State, 677 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Pardes v. State, 696 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)