OLIVER BELL, 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 while the trial court erred in denying the motion on procedural grounds, the claim itself lacked substantive merit.
Appellant filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence, alleging his written judgment incorrectly stated he was sentenced as a habitual felony offend…
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 Habitual Felony Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R.App. P. 9.140(i) from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Maynard F. Swanson, Jr., Judge. PER CURIAM.
Oliver Bell appeals the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Bell argues that the trial court erred in denying his claim on the grounds that it was successive and an abuse of process. We agree that the trial court erred in denying Bell’s claim on these grounds. However, we affirm because the claim is without substantive merit.
Bell’s motion to correct illegal sentence alleged that the written judgment did not conform to the oral pronouncement of his sentence. Specifically, he asserted that the trial court did not orally sentence him as a habitual felony offender, as the written judgment reflects. This claim is without merit because the sentencing transcript demonstrates that the trial court indeed orally sentenced Bell as a habitual felony offender. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Bell’s motion.
Affirmed.
FULMER, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Coughlin v. State, 932 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…ummary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm the postconviction court’s order denying all three of Coughlin’s claims. However, we write to recede from Ross v. State, 760 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), insofar as it permits double jeopardy challenges to convictions under rule 3.800(a). Coughlin entered an open plea of no contest to attempted first-degree murder, attempted felony murder, robbery with a deadly weapon, and fleein…
-
Gorday v. State, 907 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…CA 2003) (because illegally obtaining property through use of forged credit card and grand theft are degrees of the same offense, appellant’s conviction for grant theft vacated and conviction for fraudulent use of credit card upheld); Ross v. State, 760 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(same); Junior v. State, 763 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)(dual convictions for strong armed robbery and grand theft based on the taking of the same property cannot stand); State v. McDonald, 690 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)(pr…
-
Riley v. State, 854 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…6, 2002, the trial court sentenced Appellant to concurrent two year state prison sentences on all counts, with credit for one day served, followed by three years’ probation. We reverse and remand for resentencing. As in this case, in Ross v. State, 760 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), the defendant was sentenced to fraudulent use of a credit card and grand theft. In Ross, the Second District ruled: According to the trial court’s order denying relief, Ross’s convictions for fraud [*808] ulent use of a credit c…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence