WAUTARA WRIGHT, 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.
Wautara Wright appealed the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence imposed for cocaine trafficking. The court held that Wright's habitual offender sentence of seventeen years violated Florida law, which required sentencing pursuant to guidelines and a $50,000 fine for his offense. The court reversed and remanded for resentencing in compliance with statutory requirements.
An illegal sentence that violates statutory sentencing limitations constitutes an illegal sentence regardless of whether it was imposed pursuant to a plea agreement. A trial court lacks authority to impose such a sentence, and the illegal sentence must be corrected.
[1] A sentence is illegal when it fails to comport with statutory limitations, even if imposed pursuant to a plea agreement.
[2] A trial court is not authorized to impose an illegal sentence, regardless of a plea agreement.
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“He received a habitual offender sentence of seventeen years incarceration, although § 893.135(l)(b)l.a. clearly states that violators 'shall be sentenced pursuant to the sentencing guidelines and pay a fíne of $50,000.'”
Establishes the conflict between the sentence imposed and statutory requirements
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWright pled guilty to trafficking in cocaine in an amount between 28 and 200 grams under § 893.135(l)(b)1.a., Florida Statutes. The trial court senten…
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 Negotiated Plea Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Wautara Wright appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).
Wright pled guilty to one count of trafficking in cocaine in an amount between 28 and 200 grams, a violation of § 893.135(l)(b)l.a., Florida Statutes. He received a habitual offender sentence of seventeen years incarceration, although § 893.135(l)(b)l.a. clearly states that violators “shall be sentenced pursuant to the sentencing guidelines and pay a fíne of $50,000.” Consequently, Wright’s habitual offender sentence for a violation of this section fails to comport with statutory limitations and constitutes an illegal sentence. See State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998); Nelson v. State, 719 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)(en banc); Stanford v. State, 706 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
A trial court is not authorized to impose an illegal sentence, even pursuant to a plea agreement. See Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501 (Fla.1986).
Therefore, we reverse the order of the trial court denying Wright’s facially sufficient motion.
However, because the sentence was imposed pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, we do not vacate the sentence but instead remand to the trial court, where the state should have the opportunity to agree to resentencing within the requirements of § 893.135(l)(b)l.a F.S. If the state does not agree to such resentencing, Wright should be afforded an opportunity to withdraw his plea and the parties may proceed to trial. See Hill v. State, 730 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Williams v. State, 650 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.
JOANOS, ALLEN and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Elmario Clay v. State, 750 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…ection 893.135(l)(b)l.a. expressly mandates that persons guilty of trafficking in cocaine, where the quantity involved is 28 grams or more, but less than 200 grams, “shall be sentenced pursuant to the sentencing guidelines.... ” See Wright v. State, 743 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Stanford, 706 So. 2d at 901-02. However, because Clay was sentenced pursuant to a negotiated plea, the sentence is not vacated; but the cause is remanded to the trial court where the state shall be given an opportunity to agree…
-
Bruno v. State, 837 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…1032, 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (en banc) (upholding a conviction under section 800.04 based on a “verbal interchange with the victim”). An illegal sentence cannot be imposed, even as part of a negotiated plea agreement. See, e.g., Wright v. State, 743 So. 2d 103, 103 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (“A trial court is not authorized to impose an illegal sentence, even pursuant to a plea agreement. See Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501 (Fla.1986).”). Because neither section 794.0235(1), Florida Statutes (1997), nor any o…
-
Wheeler v. State, 864 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…was 15 years. A sentence which exceeds the statutory maximum is an illegal sentence, compare Davis v. State, 661 So. 2d 1193, 1196 (Fla.1995), and an illegal sentence cannot be imposed even as part of a negotiated plea agreement, Wright v. State, 743 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). The state argues that the sentences were not illegal because the court could have achieved an overall sentence of 25 years by ordering five-year sentences, which Wheeler also received, to run consecutive to the burglary sentence…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1986)
- Nelson v. State, 719 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Detrick Williams v. State, 650 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Stanford v. State, 706 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Hill v. State, 730 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)