FELIPE HERNANDEZ, 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 affirmed Hernandez's convictions and sentences in fourteen cases, but remanded one case for entry of an amended sentence on an aggravated battery conviction that the trial court had granted but failed to formally impose.
Convictions and sentences are affirmed, but remand is required to enter an amended sentence on the aggravated battery count in case number 00-8074 where the trial court granted the motion but failed to formally impose the amended sentence.
[1] When a trial court grants a motion to correct sentencing error but fails to enter the amended sentence, remand is required to impose the amended sentence even if the omis…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFelipe Hernandez was convicted in fourteen cases. The public defender filed an Anders brief on his behalf and also moved to correct sentencing errors …
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.800(B)(2) cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
The public defender filed a brief pursuant to Anders
on behalf of Felipe Hernandez in fourteen cases. Additionally, during the pendency of this appeal, the public defender filed a motion to correct sentencing errors pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), as to five of the fourteen cases, and amended sentences were properly entered in all but one of the five cases.2 The failure to enter an amended sentence in case number 00-8074 appeared to be nothing more than an oversight because the trial court granted the motion as to the challenged sentence in that particular case, but did not enter an amended sentence when the remainder of the amended sentences were rendered. In response to this court’s order for merit briefing, the State conceded that this case must be remanded for the imposition of an amended sentence on the aggravated battery count in case number 00-8074. Accordingly, we affirm the convictions, the sentences, and the amended sentences, but remand case number 00-8074 for the imposition of an amended sentence on the aggravated battery conviction.
Affirmed in part and remanded.
BLUE, C.J., and DAVIS, J., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
. State v. Hernandez, No. 00-8074 (Fla. 13th Cir.Ct.2001).