JESSIE LEON WILLIAMS, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for felon in possession of concealed weapon and firearm serial number alteration, finding no error in suppression motion denial, but noting a potential sentencing discrepancy that was not properly preserved for appeal.
The trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress, and the sentences imposed are legal and within statutory limits, though a discrepancy between oral and written sentencing for count I was not properly preserved for appellate review.
[1] A sentencing discrepancy between oral pronouncement and written judgment is not reviewable on direct appeal absent preservation by contemporaneous objection or rule 3.800…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged with possession of a concealed weapon by a convicted felon and altering or removing a firearm's serial number. After the trial c…
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 Possession Of A Concealed Weapon By A Convicted Felon cases and more on FLexlaw
After the trial court denied his disposi-tive motion to suppress, Appellant pled no contest to possession of a concealed weapon by a convicted felon (count I) and altering or removing the manufacturer’s serial number from a firearm (count II), reserving the right to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed an Anders brief, and after our independent review of the record, we find no error in the trial court’s ruling on the motion to suppress.
Appellant’s sentences of 48 months (with a 3-year minimum mandatory) for count I and a concurrent 36 months for count II are legal insofar as they are within the statutory maximum for the offenses and do not exceed the 48-month cap in the plea agreement. However, because the trial court orally pronounced a 36-month sentence (with the 3-year minimum mandatory) for count I, it appears that the subsequent written sentence of 48 months for that count is illegal. See Ashley v. State, 850 So.2d 1265, 1267-68 (Fla.2003). This error was not properly preserved for our review by a contemporaneous objection or a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion and, thus, we cannot correct the error in this direct appeal. See Geftos v. State, 12 So.3d 910, 912 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Young v. State, 988 So.2d 1128, 1129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Accordingly, we affirm Appellant’s judgment and sentence without prejudice to any right that he may have to file an appropriate post-conviction motion concerning the sentence imposed for count I.
AFFIRMED.
WOLF, HAWKES and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Columbus Rickey Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2003)
- Jetavious Young v. State, 988 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)
- Geftos v. State, 12 So. 3d 910 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)