CRAIG SCOTT, 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.
Craig Scott appeals his convictions for robbery with a firearm and carjacking with a firearm. While affirming the convictions, the court reverses the sentencing because the trial court imposed illegal mandatory minimum sentences that were not greater than the underlying life sentences imposed as a Prison Releasee Reoffender.
The court holds that the mandatory minimum sentences are illegal because they are not greater than the underlying life sentences imposed as a Prison Releasee Reoffender and therefore must be set aside. Additionally, the trial court lost jurisdiction to rule on the motion to correct the sentencing error because it failed to act within sixty days, rendering the subsequent order modifying the sentence a nullity.
[1] Mandatory minimum sentences imposed under section 775.087(2)(a), Florida Statutes, are illegal if they are not greater than life sentences imposed as a Prison Releasee Re…
[2] A trial court loses jurisdiction to rule on a motion to correct a sentencing error under rule 3.800(b)(2), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, sixty days after the motio…
Previewing 2 of 3 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 mandatory minimum sentences imposed were not greater than appellant's life sentences as a Prison Releasee Reoffender. Therefore, they are illegal and must be set aside.”
Establishes the core holding that mandatory minimum sentences must exceed PRRPA sentences or be invalidated.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCraig Scott was convicted of robbery with a firearm and carjacking with a firearm. The trial court sentenced him to two life sentences as a Prison Rel…
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 Illegal Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s convictions for robbery with a firearm and carjacking with a firearm. However, we reverse and remand appellant’s sentence. Appellant was given two life sentences for these convictions as a Prison Releasee Reoffender pursuant to section 775.082(9)(a)3, Florida Statutes (“PRRPA”). Appellant was also given two ten-year mandatory minimum sentence pursuant to section 775.087(2)(a), Florida Statutes (“10-20-Life”). The mandatory minimum sentences imposed were not greater than appellant’s life sentences as a Prison Releasee Reoffender. Therefore, they are illegal and must be set aside. See Smith v. State, 813 So. 2d 1002, 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)(reversing and remanding for resentencing where sentence pursuant to 10-20-Life statute was not greater than the PRRPA sentences); see also Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655, 659 (Fla.2000).
Appellant filed a motion pursuant to rule 3.800(b)(2), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, to correct the illegal sentence on June 6, 2002. The trial court did not grant the motion until August 20. As explained in Blake v. State, 814 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), a trial court’s jurisdiction to rule on a motion to correct a sentencing error ends once sixty days pass with no action on the motion. Id. at 1164 (citing Hart v. State, 773 So. 2d 1263, 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)). As a result, the trial court’s subsequent order modifying appellant’s sentence was a nullity. Id. (citing Kimbrough v. State, 766 So. 2d 1255, 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)).
Accordingly, we reverse appellant’s ten-year mandatory minimum sentences and remand this case with instructions to re-sentence appellant to two life sentences as a Prison Releasee Reoffender. REVERSED and REMANDED for re-sentencing.
SHAHOOD, TAYLOR and MAY, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McDONALD v. State, 957 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 2007)…. .Sitting en banc, the Fourth District expressly receded from the following cases in McDonald, 912 So. 2d at 76-77: Smith v. State, 813 So. 2d 1002, 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Brady v. State, 839 So. 2d 836, 837 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Scott v. State, 842 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Hill v. State, 862 So. 2d 815, 815 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Hill v. State, 869 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 871 So. 2d 874 (Fla.2004); and Malcolm v. State, 873 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). The certified conflict…
-
Hill v. State, 862 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…only when the sentence under the other statute is greater than that under the PRRPA. Id. Here, the ten-year mandatory minimum was not greater than the life sentence imposed under the PRRPA. Therefore, Hill’s sentence was illegal. See Scott v. State, 842 So. 2d 1054, 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Brady v. State, 839 So. 2d 836, 837 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Smith, 813 So. 2d at 1003. Accordingly, we reverse Hill’s ten-year mandatory minimum sentence and remand this case with instructions to resentence Hill to a life s…
-
McDONALD v. State, 912 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…f Grant to the situation presented here, concurrent lesser or equal mandatory minimum terms under the 10-20-LIFE law. Smith v. State, 813 So. 2d 1002, 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Brady v. State, 839 So. 2d 836, 837 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Scott v. State, 842 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Hill v. State, 862 So. 2d 815, 815 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Hill v. State, 869 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 4th DCA), [*77] rev. denied, 871 So. 2d 874 (Fla.2004); Malcolm v. State, 873 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). We hereby recede from t…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000)
- Kimbrough v. State, 766 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
- Smith v. State, 813 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Duver Caquimbo v. State, 773 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Hart v. State, 773 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Blake v. State, 814 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)