ANTHONY COOPER, 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.
Anthony Cooper appealed a criminal sentence, raising Apprendi constitutional arguments and claims that his sentence exceeded the legal maximum. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the sentence, finding the Apprendi argument without merit and determining that the record did not permit review of an alternative claim regarding sentencing classification.
The sentence was affirmed. The Apprendi argument lacked merit. If Cooper was sentenced as a violent career criminal, a sentence of fifteen years with a mandatory minimum of ten years is legal under Florida law. The claim that the sentencing order deviates from the oral pronouncement was not properly raised on appeal and must first be addressed in the trial court.
[1] A claim that a sentencing order deviates from the oral pronouncement of sentence must be raised in the trial court in the first instance.
[2] A claim that a defendant was not sentenced as a violent career criminal is not properly before an appellate court if it was not raised in the trial court.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“if he was, in fact, sentenced as a violent career criminal, then a sentence of fifteen years with a mandatory minimum term of ten years is a legal sentence”
Establishes that the sentence complies with Florida statutory requirements for violent career criminals
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCooper was sentenced to fifteen years with a mandatory minimum term of ten years. The sentencing documents inconsistently described his classification…
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 Minimum Mandatory Term cases and more on FLexlaw
Affirmed.
(concurring).
The sole issue raised in the trial court by the appellant’s motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) was an argument under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). I agree that the issue is without merit. Further, the appellant argues that his sentence exceeds the legal maximum, but if he was, in fact, sentenced as a violent career criminal, then a sentence of fifteen years with a mandatory minimum term of ten years is a legal *253sentence. § 775.084(4)(d)3., Fla. Stat. (2000).
In his brief here, however, the defendant also argues that he was never sentenced as a violent career criminal (“VCC”). In its response, the State acknowledges that this issue cannot be resolved without a transcript of the appellant’s sentencing, and such a transcript has never been ordered.
Because the appellant did not raise this claim (that the sentencing order deviates from the oral pronouncement), that issue is not properly before us. If the appellant contends that he was never sentenced as a VCC, then that claim must be filed in the trial court in the first instance.*
COPE, J.
(concurring).
The sole issue raised in the trial court by the appellant’s motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) was an argument under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). I agree that the issue is without merit. Further, the appellant argues that his sentence exceeds the legal maximum, but if he was, in fact, sentenced as a violent career criminal, then a sentence of fifteen years with a mandatory minimum term of ten years is a legal sentence. § 775.084(4)(d)3., Fla. Stat. (2000).
In his brief here, however, the defendant also argues that he was never sentenced as a violent career criminal (“VCC”). In its response, the State acknowledges that this issue cannot be resolved without a transcript of the appellant’s sentencing, and such a transcript has never been ordered.
Because the appellant did not raise this claim (that the sentencing order deviates from the oral pronouncement), that issue is not properly before us. If the appellant contends that he was never sentenced as a VCC, then that claim must be filed in the trial court in the first instance.*
*
The scoresheet and earlier documents in the appellant’s case have inconsistently stated that the defendant was sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender, or a habitual felony offender, or a violent career criminal.