RONALD LEE CRAIG, 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 trial court's oral pronouncement of ten-year sentences on third-degree felonies, each with a five-year maximum, exceeded the legal maximum and must be corrected.
The defendant argued that his ten-year sentences in a specific circuit court case exceeded the legal maximum for the offenses charged. The State ackno…
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 Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
On Motion for Clarification
PER CURIAM.
In his motion for clarification, defendant-appellant Craig argues that his ten-year sentences in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court case number 01-17951 exceed the legal maximum. The State acknowledges that there is a technical error. At sentencing, the oral pronouncement was for ten years in state prison with credit for time served. In case number 01-17951, counts one and six are each third degree felonies having a legal maximum of five years. Thus the ten-year sentences imposed on those counts exceed the legal maximum. However, it is clear that the trial court intended for there to be a ten-year sentence in case number 01-17951, and the sentencing intent can be achieved by making the sentences on counts one and six consecutive instead of concurrent. See Blackshear v. State, 531 So. 2d 956, 958 (Fla.1988).
Accordingly, we reverse the order now before us in part and remand for correction of the sentencing order in case number 01-17951 to provide for five-year consecutive sentences on counts one and six. The defendant need not be present. We deny the motion for clarification and certification of a question of great public importance in all other respects.
Remanded for correction of sentencing order.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Craig v. State, 45 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…onceded a technical error and directed that Craig be resen-tenced to consecutive five-year sentences on the felony counts rather than concurrent ten-year sentences, which exceeded the statutory maximum for each individual felony. See Craig v. State, 994 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). On November 2, 2006, the trial court resentenced Craig in compliance with this Court’s mandate. This Court granted Craig’s motion for belated appeal of the resentencing, which was based on Craig’s request for credit for jail tim…
Authorities Cited
- Blackshear v. State, 531 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1988)