DANIEL RICARDO SALAZAR, 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.
The court held that the defendant's interpretation of the sentencing transcript regarding count two was correct, and that counts three and four were subsumed within count one. The court also affirmed the denial of post-sentencing credit, directing the defendant to administrative remedies.
The defendant appealed an order denying his motion for postconviction relief concerning sentencing errors and post-sentencing credit. The State conced…
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 Subsumed Offenses cases and more on FLexlaw
On Rehearing and Clarification Granted
PER CURIAM.
On consideration of the motion of the State for clarification and the motion of defendant-appellant Daniel Ricardo Salazar for rehearing, we withdraw the opinion dated April 14, 2004 and substitute the following opinion.
The defendant appeals an order denying his motion to define or clarify sentence, which we treat as a motion for postconviction relief. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The State concedes that there is a sentencing error on count two, aggravated assault with a firearm, but the parties disagree on how to interpret the sentencing transcript. We conclude that the defendant’s reading of the sentencing transcript is correct. On count two, the trial court’s oral pronouncement was for a three-year mandatory minimum sentence, to be concurrent with the ten-year mandatory minimum sentence on count one. See § 775.087(2)(a)l., Fla. Stat. (1999). Thus the ten year sentence must be deleted from count two, leaving the three-year mandatory minimum sentence intact.
The State also acknowledges that count four, unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense, id. 790.07(2), is subsumed within count one, aggravated battery with a firearm. Thus, the conviction and sentence on count four must be vacated. See Grene v. State, 702 So. 2d 510, 511-12 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (en banc).
The State concedes that count three, battery, is subsumed within count one, aggravated battery with a firearm. Thus, the conviction and sentence on count three must be vacated. See id.; see also M.T. v. State, 699 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Laines v. State, 662 So. 2d 1248, 1249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), receded from on other grounds, Grene v. State, 702 So. 2d at 511— 12.
As to the foregoing issues, we remand for correction of the judgment and sentencing orders. The defendant need not be present.
The defendant next contends that he has not been granted twenty days of post-sentencing credit. The defendant states that twenty days elapsed between the date of his sentencing in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court and the date he arrived at the Florida Department of Corrections. By statute, the county jail is required to deliver a certificate to the Department of Corrections certifying the date sentence was imposed, the date the prisoner was delivered to the Department, and the post-sentencing dates the defendant was at liberty, if any. See 921.161, Fla. Stat. (1999).
If an inmate believes that the Department has not granted correct credit in accordance with the section 921.161 jail certificate, then the inmate must seek relief through the inmate grievance procedure. Lucio v. State, 673 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Barber v. State, 661 So. 2d 355, 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).
After exhausting available remedies through the inmate grievance procedure, if the inmate believes that the Departments ruling was incorrect, the inmate may then file a petition for writ of mandamus directed to the Department of Corrections. Barber, 661 So. 2d at 356. Venue for such a proceeding is in the Circuit Court for the Second Judicial Circuit, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. Id. at 356 n. 2. We therefore affirm the trial courts order denying relief on this point, without prejudice to the defendant to avail himself of the remedies outlined in Barber. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Corbblin Bush v. State, 945 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 2006)…ue lies either in Leon County or in the county where the prisoner is housed); Eastman v. State, 883 So. 2d 889, 890 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (same). The Third District Court of Appeal has stated that venue lies in Leon County. See, e.g., Salazar v. State, 892 So. 2d 545, 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Barber v. State, 661 So. 2d 355, 356 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). The decisions of the Fourth District Court of Appeal are mixed. See, e.g., Mattern v. State, 829 So. 2d 937, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (stating that venue lies in t…
-
Blanton v. State, 956 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…within the counts for aggravated battery with a firearm. Thus, the conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a felony and the sentence imposed with respect to that offense must, in any event, be vacated. See Salazar v. State, 892 So. 2d 545, 546 (Fla. 3d DCA), review dismissed, 905 So. 2d 126 (Fla.2005); Grene v. State, 702 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); see also Smith v. State, 548 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Accordingly, in the event that Mr. Blanton is retried for the subject of…
-
Gracia v. State, 98 So. 3d 1243 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…sful prosecution for the same criminal conduct. See Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932); Cleveland v. State, 587 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1991); Williams v. State, 83 So. 3d 929 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012); Salazar v. State, 892 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Mondesir v. State, 814 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), disapproved on other grounds, State v. Sousa, 903 So. 2d 923 (Fla.2005); Mosely v. State, 679 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Stripling v. State, 602 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 3d DCA…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Barber v. State, 661 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Watson Grene v. State, 702 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Laines v. State, 662 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Cameron v. State, 673 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- M.T. v. State, 699 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)