HERBERT L. GHENT, 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 sentence enhancement for firearm use was improper on a conviction for attempted first-degree felony murder where a firearm is an essential element of the underlying felony.
Herbert L. Ghent appealed the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. Ghent claimed his sentences for attempted first-degree murd…
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 Attempted Felony Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
SILBERMAN, Judge.
Herbert L. Ghent appeals the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). In his motion, Ghent makes four claims. We affirm three of the claims without comment, but we reverse the first claim.
Although the claim is inartfully drafted, Ghent -appears to allege that his sentences on two counts of attempted first-degree murder and one count of armed robbery are illegal because the convictions were improperly enhanced from first-degree felonies to life felonies for use of a firearm or weapon under section 775.087(1), Florida Statutes (1983). In Traylor v. State, 785 So. 2d 1179, 1181 (Fla.2000), reh’g denied, 785 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. May 17, 2001), the supreme court held that enhancement for use of a firearm is improper on a conviction for attempted first-degree felony murder where an essential element of the underlying felony is the use of a firearm. See also Brown v. State, 458 So. 2d 313, 314 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (holding that armed robbery cannot be enhanced under section 775.087(1), Florida Statutes (1981), because under the robbery statute it is already an enhanced charge due to the use or display of a weapon).
The trial court did not address this claim, and nothing in the record refutes it. Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court either to attach that portion of the record which conclusively refutes Ghent’s claim or to resentence Ghent.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
PARKER, A.C.J., and WHATLEY, J„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Efraimson v. State, 830 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…ddress Efraim-son’s claim on the merits. Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court either to attach that portion of the record which conclusively refutes Efraimson’s claim or to resentence him in light of Traylor. See also Ghent v. State, 795 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). POLEN, C.J., WARNER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur. . At the time of his conviction, attempted felony murder was a crime in Florida. See State v. Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla.1995).…
Authorities Cited
- Traylor v. State, 785 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 2000)
- Brown v. State, 458 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)