RAYMOND LOPEZ, 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.
Raymond Lopez appealed his revocation of probation and sentences imposed in three circuit court cases. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the convictions and sentences, but remanded one sentencing order for correction to reflect the proper consecutive sentencing structure.
The sentences were legal and did not exceed statutory limits. Sentences imposed upon revocation of probation are not limited to the original probationary term under Florida law. The written sentencing order in case 98-9720 required correction to reflect that the sentence was consecutive to case 98-4124 as orally pronounced.
[1] Sentences imposed upon revocation of probation are not limited to the original probationary term.
[2] A written sentencing order must conform to the oral pronouncement of the court.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The defendant is incorrect. See § 948.06(1), Fla. Stat. (1999); Troncoso v. State, 825 So.2d 494, 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Each sentence imposed upon the defendant is within the legal maximum.”
Establishes that sentences imposed upon revocation of probation are not limited to the original probationary term and are subject to statutory maximum sentences.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLopez was placed on probation in three separate cases. An affidavit of violation of probation was filed charging him with fleeing and eluding a police…
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 Legal Maximum Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Raymond Lopez appeals his revocation of probation and sentences imposed in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court case numbers 98-4124, 98-9720, and 99-6743. We affirm.
Defendant-appellant Lopez was placed on probation in the above three cases. Thereafter an affidavit of violation of probation was filed, charging the defendant with fleeing and eluding a police officer, reckless driving, and other violations. After the conclusion of the arresting officer’s testimony at the violation of probation hearing, the defendant entered a plea bargain for a twelve-year term.
The trial court imposed a twelve-year sentence in circuit court case number 99-6743, a five-year term in circuit court case number 98MJ24 (concurrent with the sentence in circuit court case number 99-6743), and a five-year term in circuit court case number 98-9720, consecutive to the sentence in circuit court case number 98-4124 (concurrent with the sentence in circuit court case number 99-6743).
The written sentencing order in circuit court case number 98-9720 does not conform to the oral pronouncement. It does not include the provision that the sentence be consecutive to circuit court case number 98-4124. We therefore remand in circuit court case number 98-9720 for correction of the sentencing order. Appointed counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
The appellant has filed a pro se brief in which he argues that the sentences are illegal. The defendant contends that the sentences imposed upon revocation of probation cannot exceed the original two-year probationary term. The defendant is incorrect. See § 948.06(1), Fla. Stat. (1999); Troncoso v. State, 825 So. 2d 494, 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Each sentence imposed upon the defendant is within the legal maximum.
The defendant also attempts to challenge the factual basis pursuant to which he was originally placed on probation in circuit court case number 99-6743. That issue is not properly before us. The issue was first raised with the trial court by letter after the defendant’s notice of appeal had already been filed. Our ruling is without prejudice to the defendant to seek postconviction relief. We express no opinion on the merits of any such claim.
We affirm the convictions and sentences in all three circuit court cases. We remand the sentencing order in circuit court case number 98-9720 for correction of the sentencing order to reflect that it is consecutive to the sentence imposed in circuit court case number 98-4124.
Affirmed; remanded for correction of order.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lopez v. State, 987 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…this Court affirmed Lopez’s judgment and sentence with the direction that the sentencing order in case number F98-9720 be corrected to reflect that it was to be served consecutive to the sentence imposed in case number F98-4124. See Lopez v. State, 832 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). On January 27, 2003, Lopez filed a Motion for Post Conviction Relief in case number F99-6743, which challenged his judgment and sentence. Lopez argued that the guilty plea entered in case number F99-6743 was involuntary due to c…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- S.M. v. State, 825 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Astrop v. Orange Cnty., 825 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)