GEORGE CALLOWAY, 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 a sentencing error was not preserved for direct appeal because the defendant failed to object at the sentencing hearing or file a post-sentencing motion.
Calloway pled no contest to burglary and was sentenced as a habitual offender. He appealed, arguing the court used pre-1993 criteria for habitual offe…
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 Motion To Correct Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
W. SHARP, Judge.
Calloway appeals his sentence imposed after he pled no contest to one count of burglary of an occupied structure.1 The judge sentenced Calloway to ten years as an habitual offender. His main point on appeal is that the court erred in imposing an habitual offender sentence because it employed the pre-1993 criteria and ignored the additional requirement that one of the qualifying prior offenses not be for drug possession.2 We affirm.
At the plea hearing, the judge informed Calloway that the state had announced its intention to seek enhanced penalties for habitual offender treatment, with a maximum possible sentence of ten years in prison. Sentencing was held July 7, 1997, and the parties agreed the sentencing guidelines scoresheet, which showed a permissible guidelines sentencing range of 15 to 25 months in prison, was correct. Defense counsel did not object to the sentence at the sentencing hearing. He failed to file a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), as well as a motion to correct the sentence after the alleged sentencing error had occurred, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h).
Thus, we must conclude that the sentencing error was not preserved and therefore cannot be raised in the direct appeal. See § 921.051 (effective July 1, 1996); Fla. R.App. P. 9.140(b). Hubbard v. State, 691 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), citing Middleton v. State, 689 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Further, even if we were to reach the merits of Calloway’s appeal, there was sufficient evidence adduced in the record to establish Calloway had been convicted at a prior time of two nondrug-related felonies.
AFFIRMED.
COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . §§ 810.02(1) and (4); 810.07, Fla. Stat. (1997).
. § 775.084, Fla. Stat. (1997).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 2000)…a trial, has summarily affirmed all cases presenting an unpreserved sentencing error. See, e.g., Maddox v. State, 708 So. 2d 617, 621 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (en banc), approved in part, disapproved in part, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000); Calloway v. State, 718 So. 2d 268, 268 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). A summary disposition with a citation to Robinson, if no Robinson issue is presented, or a citation to Maddox, if,-no fundamental sentencing error is presented, will advance the interests of judicial economy and fulfill th…
-
State v. Jefferson, 758 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 2000)…, affirming sentences in all appeals presenting unpre-served sentencing errors for appellate review. See, e.g., Maddox v. State, 708 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), approved in- part, disapproved in part, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000); Calloway v. State, 718 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Parks v. State, 719 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), review granted, 727 So. 2d 909 (Fla.1999). We find it is clear from the language of section 924.051(3) that the Legislature intended to condition reversal of a conviction on…
-
Gallon v. State, 771 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…unscoreable burglary conviction for which he was sentenced as a violent career criminal, and counsel failed to object to the improper calculation on his scoresheet; and 2) his sentence is illegal pursuant to this court’s decision in Heggs v. State, 718 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). As to Gallon’s first claim, the trial court stated that Gallon was not sentenced as a violent career criminal in case number 97-5065. The trial court therefore concluded that the burglary conviction which was scored as an additi…
Authorities Cited
- Arlecia Michelle Middleton v. State, 689 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Himebaugh v. Hutton, 691 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Hubbard v. State, 691 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)