REGINALD C. FITZPATRICK, 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 reversed the denial of a Rule 3.800(a) motion challenging a habitual offender designation where the sentencing transcript was not provided for appellate review, holding that such claims implicate double jeopardy protections and constitute illegal sentences.
A Rule 3.800(a) motion challenging a discrepancy between a written habitual offender designation and the oral pronouncement of sentence implicates double jeopardy protections and presents an illegal sentence cognizable under that rule.
[1] A discrepancy between a written habitual offender designation and the oral pronouncement of sentence at sentencing implicates double jeopardy protections and constitutes…
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 intelligenceFitzpatrick filed a Rule 3.800(a) motion alleging that his written sentence contained a habitual offender designation but that the sentencing judge di…
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 Rule 3.800(A) Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges an order by which his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion was denied. In this motion the appellant alleged that his written sentence contains a habitual offender designation, but that the sentencing judge did not pronounce a habitual offender sentence. Although this court indicated that such a claim was not cognizable under rule 3.800(a) in Luckey v. State, 811 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), we have since concluded that in light of the supreme court’s decision in Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla.2003), approving Evans v. State, 675 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), this is an issue implicating double jeopardy protections and an illegal sentence so as to be presentable under rule 3.800(a). See Smith v. State, 844 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).
In denying the appellant’s motion the trial court found that the appellant was properly sentenced as a habitual offender, and referred to the sentencing transcript. However, that transcript was not attached to the appealed order, and has not otherwise been provided for the record on appeal. The order denying the motion is therefore reversed, and the case is remanded so that the court may either attach the transcript or take such other action as may be appropriate.
WOLF, C.J., ALLEN and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007)…both to its order denying relief, but did not attach a transcript of the sentencing proceedings. On appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of Williams’ motion and certified conflict with Fitzpatrick v. State, 863 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), and Berthiaume v. State, 864 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Williams, 913 So. 2d at 1239. The district court further concluded that “a mere allegation of a difference between the oral pronouncement and the written judgment is…
-
Wilmann Renaud v. State, 926 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 2006)…PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review Renaud v. State, 901 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), a decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal certifying conflict with the decisions in Fitzpatrick v. State, 863 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), and Berthiaume v. State, 864 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. Upon further consideration, we have now determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. A requirement for relief under Flor…
-
Nielson v. State, 984 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…2d DCA 2003); Jones v. State, 780 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Byers v. State, 916 So. 2d 923, 924 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Mumahan v. State, 916 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Cooley v. State, 901 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Fitzpatrick v. State, 863 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Wyche v. State, 624 So. 2d 830, 832 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Columbus Rickey Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2003)
- Evans v. State, 675 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Luckey v. State, 811 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Colby Allen Smith v. State, 844 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)