WILLIAM CERNAK, 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 trial court must provide documentation to support its conclusion that a sentence is legal when challenged as exceeding the statutory maximum.
Appellant alleged his sentences for second-degree felonies exceeded the statutory maximum. The trial court summarily denied his motion to correct the …
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 Statutory Maximum Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
William Cernak appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. Lacking documentation to explain the legality of sentences which he alleges exceed the statutory maximum, we are compelled to reverse.
Cernak alleges that he was convicted of two second-degree felonies, and sentenced to two thirty-one year prison terms. If the facts are as Cernak states, his sentences illegally exceed the statutory maximum of fifteen years for a second-degree felony.
The trial court did not attach any documentation to its order to explain its conclusion that the sentences are legal. Consequently, it is impossible for this court to evaluate the merit of the claim, and the case must be remanded for reconsideration. Upon remand, the trial court must either attach to its order the documents that support its conclusion that the sentence is legal, or, if the trial court determines that the sentence is illegal, resen-tence Cernak.
Reversed and remanded.
BLUE, A.C.J., and GREEN and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.