RAMON SEVERO CATALAN, 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 oral pronouncement of a sentence controls over a written order when there is a discrepancy, and thus the habitual felony offender classification should be removed from the sentence in one case.
Appellant pled guilty to grand theft and was sentenced to jail and probation. While on probation, he was charged with a second grand theft, his probat…
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 Oral Pronouncement Vs. Written Order cases and more on FLexlaw
SHEPHERD, J.
Appellant, Ramon Severo Catalan, appeals an order of the trial court denying a motion to correct illegal sentence brought by him pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm in part and reverse in part.
On August 28, 2001, Catalan pled guilty to grand theft in Case No. 01-17905 and was sentenced to nine months in the Miami-Dade County Jail, followed by two years probation. On February 22, 2002, while on probation, he was apprehended on a second grand theft charge. On May 31, 2002, the trial court revoked his probation, and sentenced him to five years of incarceration as a habitual felony offender. He was also adjudicated guilty on the second charge and sentenced to a five-year concurrent sentence.
Upon review of the plea colloquy of the revocation proceeding in Case No. 01-17905, it does not appear anywhere that Catalan was adjudicated a habitual felony offender. Where there is a difference between the court’s oral pronouncement and a written order, the oral pronouncement controls. Reyes v. State, 888 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). Accordingly, we direct that Catalan’s sentence in Case No. 01-17905 be corrected to delete his classification as a habitual felony offender in that case. The defendant need not be present. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in all other respects.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and case remanded with directions. '
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
DE LA Rosa v. State, 979 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…n of the habitual violent felony offender designation if the trial court’s oral pronouncements at the violation of probation proceedings do not indicate that De La Rosa was being sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender. See Catalan v. State, 911 So. 2d 203, 204 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (holding that written order adjudicating defendant a habitual felony offender must be corrected to conform to trial court’s oral pronouncement of sentence, which did not include habitual felony offender adjudication). [*1091]…
-
Thompson v. State, 987 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…ntencing following a successful rule 3.800(a) motion, but the state has the right to seek an upward departure). A defendant need not be present when a court simply deletes a HFO designation without otherwise changing the sentence. Catalan v. State, 911 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). In this case, however, when the trial court deleted the HFO designation, there was no justification for a sentence above the guidelines. Cf Dougherty v. State, 785 So. 2d 1221,1223 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (stating a defendant is enti…
-
Macdroleya Francois v. State, 923 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…ng that restitution was to be made in twelve equal monthly installments. The trial court’s oral pronouncement is binding and controls even though it failed to include the language of equal monthly installments in its written order. Catalan v. State, 911 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (where there is a difference between the court’s oral pronouncement and written order, the oral pronouncement controls). The defendant admitted at the revocation hearing that he had not paid any court costs or restitution as order…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Reyes v. State, 888 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)