EDWARD ELWOOD MASTERSON, 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.
The court held that the appellant was convicted of the non-aggravated offense despite the incorrect title in the information and judgment, and affirmed the conviction.
[1] A conviction will be affirmed when the information, evidence, jury instructions, and verdict all correspond to the elements of the charged offense, despite an incorrect t…
[2] A conviction for fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer is proper when the factual allegations and jury instructions track the non-aggravated statutory…
Previewing 2 of 4 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 fleeing a law enforcement officer under Fla. Stat. § 316.1935(3)(a), but the information and subsequent proceedings incorre…
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 Fleeing Or Attempting To Elude A Law Enforcement Officer cases and more on FLexlaw
In this Anders1 appeal, Appellant challenges his conviction and sentence on several grounds; the only one that merits discussion is his claim that he was convicted of an uncharged “aggravated” offense. Based on our independent review of the record and the supplemental briefs of counsel filed pursuant to this Court’s Causey 2 order, we find no reversible error but remand for correction of a technical error in the judgment.
The State’s information charged Appellant with a violation of section 316.1935(3)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), relating to fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer, and the factual allegations in the information track the language of this statutory provision. However, the information lists the title of the offense as “aggravated” fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer. This incorrect title was repeated by the attorneys and the court throughout the proceedings below, but the evidence presented at trial, the instructions to the jury, and the verdict form all corresponded to the elements of the non-aggravated offense. The written judgment cites the correct statutory provision and degree of crime for the non-aggravated offense, but again, incorrectly uses the term “aggravated” in the title of the crime.
Because it is clear that Appellant was charged with, and found guilty of, the non-aggravated offense proscribed by section 316.1935(3)(a), we affirm his conviction and sentence but remand for the trial court to correct the written judgment to reflect the title of the offense as “fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer.” See Jones v. State, 620 So.2d 236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Palmer v. State, 935 So.2d 630 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Appellant need not be present for this purely ministerial correction. Jones v. State, 969 So.2d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).
AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions.
LEWIS, C.J., CLARK and RAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Enrico T. Rhodes v. State, 168 So. 3d 244 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
-
White v. State, 199 So. 3d 497 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)
-
Trevorisse Thomas v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- State v. Causey, 503 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1987)
- Tirrell Tyrone Palmer v. State, 935 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- Jones v. State, 969 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
- Jones v. State, 620 So. 2d 236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)