MATTHEW CRUNDWELL, 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 held that the trial court erred in imposing concurrent habitual violent felony offender and prison releasee reoffender sentences.
[1] A trial court errs in imposing concurrent habitual violent felony offender and prison releasee reoffender sentences.
[2] A motion to correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) is the proper procedural vehicle to challenge sentencing enhancements.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMatthew Crundwell was charged with two robberies and received enhanced sentences under multiple statutes. He moved to correct sentencing errors, and t…
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 Prison Releasee Reoffender Act cases and more on FLexlaw
FULMER, Chief Judge.
Matthew Crundwell challenges the sentences imposed in two lower court cases. In case number 03-23007, Crundwell was charged with a robbery that occurred on December 29, 2003, and in case number 04-0210, Crundwell was charged with a robbery that occurred on December 31, 2003. The State filed a notice and an amended notice to enhance Crundwell’s sentences by the habitual felony offender statute, the habitual violent felony offender statute, the prison releasee reoffender statute, and the three-time convicted felon statute.
Crundwell entered an open plea to the trial court in both cases and was sentenced on each case to twenty-five years in prison, followed by two years’ community control, and three years’ probation, with the sentences to run concurrent. The trial court found that Crundwell satisfied the criteria for all four statutory enhancements. On each case, the court sentenced Crundwell as a habitual felony offender and imposed a ten-year minimum mandatory as a habitual violent felony offender, a fifteen-year minimum mandatory as a prison releasee reoffender, and a fifteen-year minimum mandatory as a three-time violent offender. Crundwell filed a motion to correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) challenging the enhancements. The trial court granted the motion in part and resentenced him to the same period of incarceration, followed by community control and probation, as a habitual violent felony offender with a ten-year mandatory term and as a prison releasee reoffender with a fifteen-year mandatory term.
Pursuant to Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000), and Lewis v. State, 789 So. 2d 974 (Fla.2001), the trial court erred in imposing the concurrent habitual violent felony offender sentence with the prison releasee reoffender sentence in each case. The State concedes error. We, therefore, reverse and remand for the trial court to vacate the habitual violent felony offender sentences.
Reversed and remanded.
LaROSE, J., and BAIRD, W. DOUGLAS, Associate-Judge, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000)
- Vashon Oland Lewis v. State, 789 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2001)