COREY TOWNSEND, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
A jury convicted the appellant of attempted second-degree murder and the court imposed a life sentence with 25 years’ minimum mandatory pursuant to the 10-20-Life statute, section 775.087(2)(a)S., Florida Statutes. In this postconviction motion the appellant argues that before his sentence can be enhanced, the jury must make a finding that he discharged a firearm causing great bodily harm. He argues that his sentence enhancement appears to be illegal because the jury did not make this express finding. See § 775.087(2)(a)3., Florida Statutes; Mendenhall v. State, 48 So.3d 740 (Fla. 2010) (“The 10-20-Life statute provides for mandatory minimum sentences for certain enumerated offenses, including attempted murder, where a defendant ... discharges a firearm and as the result of the discharge, inflicted death or great bodily harm[.] ... Mendenhall ... assertfed] that ‘the jury did not make a finding that ‘death or great bodily harm was inflicted on any person.’ ”). The trial court dismissed the claim as facially insufficient and did not attach any portion of the record refuting the appellant’s claim. We conclude the appellant’s claim is facially sufficient and consequently we reverse and remand for the trial court to either attach portions of the record which refute the appellant’s claim that the jury did not make a finding that he discharged a firearm causing great bodily harm, or to provide relief to the appellant by resentencing him without the sentence enhancement.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PADOVANO, ROWE, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ducker v. State, 197 So. 3d 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…the written judgment reflects a conviction for count 4 as originally charged: a first degree misdemeanor. Accordingly, on remand, the trial court shall correct the judgment to reflect that count 4 is a second degree misdemeanor. See Clark v. State, 85 So. 3d 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (affirming Anders appeal but remanding with directions to correct con [*1096] viction in judgment); see also Bryant v. State, 124 So. 3d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (affirming Anders appeal but remanding for correction of scrivener’s…
-
Dominique Hall v. State, 109 So. 3d 847 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…In this Anders appeal, we affirm the judgment and sentence but remand for the trial court to correct the judgment to reflect a conviction for home-invasion robbery pursuant to section 812.135(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2009). See Clark v. State, 85 So. 3d 1190, 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (affirming Anders appeal but remanding for correction of scrivener’s error). AFFIRMED and REMANDED. PADOVANO, ROBERTS, and CLARK, JJ., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967…
-
King v. State, 168 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…We affirm appellant’s judgment and sentence; however, we remand for the trial court to correct a scrivener’s error in the judgment to reflect that appellant was convicted after a jury trial as opposed to a plea of nolo contendré. See Clark v. State, 85 So. 3d 1190, 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (affirming Anders appeal but remanding for correction of scrivener’s error in judgment). Additionally, because the record reveals potential errors in the imposition of costs and fees, including a possible discrepancy betw…
Authorities Cited
- Corey v. Corey, 48 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 2010)
- Mendenhall v. State, 48 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 2010)