WALLACE REID HURT, JR., 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.
Trial court's summary denial of post-conviction motion alleging discrepancy between orally pronounced sentence (5 years imprisonment plus 5 years probation) and written judgment (15 years imprisonment plus 5 years probation) reversed because court failed to attach record portions to refute the claim.
A trial court must attach portions of the record to conclusively refute a facially sufficient claim of sentence discrepancy between oral pronouncement and written judgment, or reverse the sentence to match the oral pronouncement.
[1] A trial court must attach record portions to conclusively refute a facially sufficient claim that an orally pronounced sentence differs from the written judgment, or corr…
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 intelligence“Because the trial court failed to attach any portion of the record to refute this claim, the trial court's summary denial is reversed and remanded for attachment of the record portions to conclusively refute Appellant's claim or Appellant's sentence must be corrected to reflect the orally pronounced sentence.”
Court's holding on the procedural requirement for summary denial of sentence discrepancy claims.
Appellant alleged the trial court orally pronounced a 5-year imprisonment sentence followed by 5-year probation, but the written judgment reflected 15…
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 Summary Denial cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his post-conviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800.1 Because the trial court failed to attach portions of the record to conclusively refute Appellant’s claim that the sentence contained in the written judgment is inconsistent with the orally pronounced sentence, we reverse.
Appellant alleges that the sentence pronounced in open court was a 5-year term of imprisonment to be followed by a 5-year term of probation. The sentence recorded in the written judgement is a 15-year term of imprisonment with credit for time served, followed by a 5-year term of probation. Such an allegation is a facially sufficient claim cognizable in a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.800. See Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla.2003); Greene v. State, 853 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Because the trial court failed to attach any portion of the record to refute this claim, the trial court’s summary denial is reversed and remanded for attachment of the record portions to conclusively refute Appellant’s claim or Appellant’s sentence must be corrected to reflect the orally pronounced sentence.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
BOOTH, POLSTON and HAWKES, JJ., concur. . Appellant’s motion purported to be filed pursuant to rule 3.700(a), the trial court correctly treated the motion as a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to rule 3.800.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Columbus Rickey Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2003)
- Greene v. State, 853 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)