GARY H. KENT, 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 oral sentence pronouncements control over written ones, and discretionary fines must be orally imposed. The trial court's failure to rule on a motion within 60 days renders a subsequent ruling a nullity.
Appellant was convicted of several offenses and appealed his sentence. He argued discrepancies between the oral and written sentences and improper lum…
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 Discretionary Fines cases and more on FLexlaw
Gary Kent appeals his conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, possession of cannabis, and tampering with physical evidence. We affirm Appellant’s conviction without comment as to the felon-in possession and tampering charges, and with reference to State v. Adkins, 96 So.3d 412 (Fla.2012), as to the cannabis charge, but reverse to correct minor errors in Appellant’s sentence.1
Appellant first argues that the oral sentence does not conform to the written sentence as to the amount of time served. Where the oral pronouncement and the written sentence do not agree, the oral pronouncement controls. Williams v. State, 957 So.2d 600, 603 (Fla.2007). Here, the record indicates the trial court pronounced 646 days’ credit for time served, while the written sentence included credit for only 640 days. We therefore reverse and remand for correction of the written sentence.
Appellant next argues that the lump-sum imposition of discretionary fines and costs was erroneous. While mandatory costs may be imposed in a lump-sum amount, discretionary fines must be orally imposed. Bryant v. State, 47 So.3d 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). We therefore reverse the imposition of the $1,000 fine and attendant five percent surcharge and $20 court cost.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
WOLF, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Adkins, 96 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 2012)
- Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007)
- Bryant v. State, 47 So. 3d 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Waters v. State, 916 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)