JAMES CHRISTOPHER SHELTON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2006-07-28
No. 5D05-4081
GRIFFIN and MONACO, JJ., concur.
936 So. 2d 680 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2006)

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.

Synopsis

Shelton appealed the summary denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claim under rule 3.850, but the central issue became whether his sentence complied with the plea agreement capping his sentence at 139 months. The court reversed and remanded, directing the trial court to either strike the probationary term or allow Shelton to withdraw his plea, as the imposed sentence with probation exceeded the plea bargain terms.


Holding

The court reversed and remanded, holding that the probationary term imposed exceeded the plea agreement's terms and directing the trial court to either strike the probationary term or allow Shelton the opportunity to withdraw his nolo plea. The sentence should also be modified to reflect the 138.15 months Shelton actually received rather than the trial court's erroneous 139-month correction.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court's correction of a scrivener's error in a sentence may be reversed if it impermissibly increases the defendant's sentence beyond the terms of a plea agreemen…

[2] When a trial court's sentence exceeds the terms of a plea agreement, the appellate court may order the trial court to strike the offending probationary term or allow the…

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“The correction of this scrivener's error was designed to rectify the trial court's error in sentencing Shelton to a consecutive five-year term in case no. 03-CF-206, which violated the plea agreement.”

Establishes that the trial court recognized a sentencing error that violated the plea agreement

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

In July 2003, Shelton pleaded guilty in ten separate cases under a plea agreement capping his sentence at 139 months with a ten-year minimum mandatory…

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.


Opinion of the Court
THOMPSON, J.

THOMPSON, J.

Appellant James Shelton (“Shelton”) appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence based upon ineffective assistance of counsel. In July 2003, Shelton pled guilty in ten separate cases based on a plea agreement that capped his sentence at 139 months with a ten-year minimum mandatory based on Florida’s 10-20-life statute.1 Under the agreement, Shelton was allowed to request a youthful offender designation. In August 2003, the trial court rejected the youthful offender designation and sentenced Shelton as follows:

Case 2003-CF-2001: one count of burglary of a structure while armed, one count of grand theft and one count of grand theft, statutory property; 138.15 months in the Department of Corrections (“DOC”) on count one, with ten years minimum mandatory, and five years on count two and three followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-206: one count of burglary of a structure and one count of grand theft; five years DOC, consecutive to case 2003-CF-201, followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-143: one count of burglary of a structure and one count of grand theft; five years DOC followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-144: one count of burglary of a dwelling and one count of grand theft; five years DOC followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-145: one count of burglary of a dwelling and one count grand theft, five years DOC followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-146: one count of burglary of a dwelling and one count of grand theft; five years DOC followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-200: one count of grand theft; five years DOC followed by five years probation

Case 2003-CF-203: one count of burglary of a structure and one count of petit theft; five years DOC on count one and time served on count two followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-208: on count of burglary of a structure and one count of grand theft; five years DOC followed by five years probation;

Case 2003-CF-211: one count of burglary of a structure and one count of grand theft; five years DOC followed by five years probation.

Shelton did not appeal.

In September 2005, Shelton filed a rule 3.850 motion that raised six separate claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, all of which were summarily denied. We affirm the denial of Shelton’s claims without further comment. However, the trial court granted relief to the extent that it ordered the DOC “to amend its records to reflect that Shelton was sentenced to 139 months in the Department of Corrections followed by five (5) years probation.” The correction of this scrivener’s error was designed to rectify the trial court’s error in sentencing Shelton to a consecutive five-year term in case no. 03-CF-206, which violated the plea agreement.

Shelton timely appealed, and the State conceded that the trial court’s correction still exceeded the terms of the plea bargain because the probation following the 139-month sentence was not a specific term of the plea agreement.2 The State concedes this court should rectify the sentencing issue under Green v. State, 700 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Accord ingly, we reverse with directions that the trial court either strike the probationary term or allow Shelton the opportunity to withdraw his nolo plea. See Green, 700 So. 2d at 388; see also Hill v. State, 441 So. 2d 650, 651 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (reversing with instructions to strike the $2,500 fine, which exceeded the plea agreement, or offer the opportunity to withdraw plea). We also note the sentence should be modified to reflect the 138.15-month sentence Shelton actually received.

REVERSED and REMANDED with DIRECTIONS.

GRIFFIN and MONACO, JJ., concur. . See § 775.087, Fla. Stat. (2003).

. We also note that an independent review of the record, including the sentencing transcript and order, indicates Shelton was actually sentenced to 138.15 months’ incarceration, with a ten-year minimum mandatory. Therefore, the court’s correction impermissi-bly increased Shelton’s sentence from 138.15 months to 139 months.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw