DANIEL MARTINEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 appellant was not entitled to additional credit for time served, but that sentences for third-degree felonies may exceed legal maximums.
Daniel Martinez appealed an order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence. The State conceded that some sentences for third-degree felonies …
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 Maximum Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Daniel Martinez appeals from an order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
We concur with the trial court that the appellant is not entitled to additional credit for time served. The State concedes, however, that the sentences imposed for third degree felonies in appellant’s 1993 cases appear to exceed the legal maximum, and it is possible that the sentences for third degree felonies on the appellant’s 1994 eases also exceed the legal maximum.1 We therefore remand for correction of such third degree felony sentences as needed. Defendant need not be present at resentencing.
Reversed in part, and remanded.
. For offenses committed on or after January 1, 1994, “If a recommended sentence under the guidelines exceeds the maximum sentence otherwise authorized by s. 775.082, the sentence recommended under the guidelines must be imposed, absent a departure.” § 921.001(5), Fla. Slat. (1993).