ANDRE L. WHITE, 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.
Andre White appealed the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), arguing that his conviction for attempted felony murder was incorrectly classified as a life felony rather than a first-degree felony. The court affirmed the denial but remanded to correct a clerical error in the judgment that misclassified the conviction contrary to the trial court's oral pronouncement.
The defendant's conviction was not incorrectly classified; the trial court properly understood and stated that Count IV was punishable by a maximum of life imprisonment as a first-degree felony. However, the written judgment contained a clerical error that must be corrected to reflect the proper classification as a first-degree felony punishable by life imprisonment.
[1] A trial court may deny a motion to correct an illegal sentence on the merits, even if the motion was filed after a prior motion on the same issue.
[2] Relitigation of the same issue raised in a prior motion to correct an illegal sentence is barred by collateral estoppel.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“Rule 3.800(a), however, does not prohibit the filing of successive motions. What is prohibited is relitigation of the same issue(s) raised in an earlier 3.800 motion decided adversely to the defendant.”
Establishes that successive 3.800 motions are permitted if they raise different claims, not merely successive filings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWhite pleaded guilty to attempted armed robbery with a firearm and attempted felony murder with a firearm. He received a ten-year minimum mandatory se…
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 Clerical Error In Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Andre L. White (“the defendant”) appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Although we affirm, we do so with directions to correct the Judgment to reflect the trial court’s oral pronouncement.
The trial court’s order indicates that the defendant’s 3.800(a) motion was denied as “successive.” Rule 3.800(a), however, does not prohibit the filing of successive motions. What is prohibited is relitigation of the same issue(s) raised in an earlier 3.800 motion decided adversely to the defendant. See State v. McBride, 848 So.2d 287, 290-91 (Fla.2003) (holding that relitigation of the same issue in an earlier 3.800 motion is barred by collateral estoppel). Although we could not determine from the record before us whether *258the trial court’s ruling was based on multiple 3.800 filings raising different claims (which is permitted), or a prior determination on the merits of the same claim (which is generally not permitted), we affirm the order denying relief on the merits. See Robertson v. State, 829 So.2d 901, 906 (Fla. 2002) (holding that although a trial court may have conducted a legally incorrect analysis when crafting its order, if the court reached the right result, albeit for the wrong reason, the order may nonetheless be affirmed).
The record reflects that pursuant to a negotiated plea, the defendant pled guilty to Count II: attempted armed robbery (with a firearm), and to Count IV: attempted felony murder (with a firearm), and he received a ten-year minimum mandatory sentence on Count II and a concurrent twenty-year minimum mandatory sentence on Count IV. The defendant contends that the trial court incorrectly reclassified his conviction in Count IV, attempted first degree felony murder with a deadly weapon, to a life felony, contra to Traylor v. State, 785 So.2d 1179, 1181-82 (Fla.2000) (holding that attempted first degree murder with a deadly weapon is a first degree felony punishable by a term of years not exceeding life, not a life felony).
The defendant is incorrect. However, his confusion is understandable. The sentencing transcript clearly reflects that the trial court understood and properly informed the defendant that Count IV was punishable by a maximum sentence of life, as opposed to a life felony.
THE COURT: Mr. White, you are charged with attempted armed robbery, which is a second degree felony, punishable by a maximum period of incarceration of 15 years. Is a firearm involved?
THE STATE: Yes, so that would have a ten year minimum mandatory.
THE COURT: With a ten year minimum mandatory sentence. You are also charged in count III with attempted—
THE STATE: Actually, it’s count IV for Mr. White.
THE COURT: I’m sorry, you are right, count IV, attempted felony murder with a firearm. That is punishable by a maximum period of incarceration of life imprisonment with a ten year—
THE STATE: No, for Mr. White the minimum mandatory on this is 25 years, but part of the plea negotiations between [defense counsel] and myself, we agreed to reduce that to a 20 year minimum mandatory.
The scoresheet prepared by the State also correctly scored the attempted felony murder as a category “9” offense, which under section 921.0022, Florida Statutes (2001), specifies that attempted felony murder under section 782.051(1) is a first degree felony, scored as a category “9” offense.
Despite the trial court’s oral pronouncements and the prosecutor, defense attorney and the trial court’s treatment of Count IV as a first degree felony punishable up to life imprisonment (based on the possession/use of a firearm during commission of the offense), the Judgment contains a clerical error. On page one of the Judgment, it reads that the defendant was convicted in Count IV to attempted felony murder with a deadly weapon and classified the conviction “L/F,” a life felony. We, therefore remand with directions that the Judgment be corrected to note the correct classification of Count IV as a first degree felony punishable by life imprisonment (1st pbl.). Because this was clearly a clerical error, the correction may be made without the defendant being present. However, the Clerk of the Court is directed to send the defendant a copy of the corrected Judgment upon issuance.
*259Affirmed; but remanded with instructions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Turner v. State, 250 So. 3d 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…Turner v. State , 228 So. 3d 581 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). In denying Turner's present, successive rule 3.800(a) motion, the lower court correctly recognized that while the filing of successive rule 3.800(a) motions is not forbidden, see White v. State , 41 So. 3d 257, 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), a defendant is barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel from relitigating the same issue raised in an earlier rule 3.800 motion decided adversely to the defendant. See State v. McBride , 848 So. 2d 287, 290-91 (Fla. 200…
-
Sanchez v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)…s (counts 1, 3, 5, 7 & 13) as first-degree felonies punishable by life in prison (1PBL). See § 812.13(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2021). This correction can be made without the defendant being present because it was clerical error. See White v. State, 41 So. 3d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010). Affirmed and remanded with instructions.…
-
Turner v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited
- State v. Antoine L. McBRIDE, 848 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2003)
- Swett v. State, 829 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2002)
- Robertson v. State, 829 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2002)
- Traylor v. State, 785 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 2000)