CORTEZ HATTEN, 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 circuit courts may impose sentences in addition to mandatory minimums under the 10-20-Life statute, even if the total sentence exceeds the statutory maximum for the felony, and certified conflict with other districts on this issue. The court also remanded for correction of minor sentencing errors.
Appellant was convicted of manslaughter, attempted second-degree murder, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He appealed his judgment an…
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 10-20-Life Statute (Fla. Stat. § 775.087) cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
We grant Appellant’s motion for rehearing, withdraw our prior opinion, and substitute this opinion in its place in order to *850clarify our disposition of Appellant’s fourth issue. We deny Appellant’s motion for rehearing en banc.
In this direct appeal, Appellant seeks review of his judgment and sentence for manslaughter (count I), attempted second degree murder (count III), and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (count V). He raises five issues: (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal on count III; (2) the jury instructions for justifiable use of deadly force were fundamentally erroneous; (8) the statute upon which count V was based is unconstitutionally vague; (4) his 40-year sentence with a 25-year mandatory minimum term for count III is illegal because the 40fyear term exceeds the 30-year statutory maximum for a first-degree felony;1 and (5) the trial court erred in imposing several costs. The latter two issues were preserved by a motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2).
We affirm the first and second issues without comment. We affirm the third issue based upon Weeks v. State, 146 So.3d 81 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), and Kraay v. State, 148 So.3d 789 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
We affirm the fourth issue based upon Kelly v. State, 137 So.3d 2, 6-7 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), wherein this court held that “circuit courts in the First District may, pursuant to [the 10-20-Life statute], impose a sentence in addition to its selected mandatory minimum sentence without regard to whether additional statutory authority for such an additional sentence exists.” And, as we did in Kelly, we certify conflict with Wiley v. State, 125 So.3d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013), to the extent that case held that a trial court may not impose a sentence in excess of the mandatory minimum term imposed under the 10-20-Life statute unless such a sentence is authorized by some other statute. We also certify conflict with decisions from the Second,2 Fourth,3 and Fifth4 Districts which held that the trial court may not impose a sentence in excess of 30 years for a first-degree felony under the 10-20-Life statute when the court imposes a mandatory minimum term of less than 30 years.
With respect to the fifth issue, we remand for correction of the following minor sentencing errors: imposition of a $230 cost pursuant to section 938.05(l)(a), Florida Statutes, when the statutory maximum is $225; imposition of a $415 cost pursuant *851to section 775.083(2), Florida Statutes, when the statutory maximum is $50; and imposition of the $100 cost of prosecution without citing the statutory basis for the cost. We recognize that, during the pen-dency of this appeal, the trial court entered a corrected judgment to correct these sentencing errors; however, that judgment is a legal nullity because it was filed more than 60 days after Appellant filed his rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(1)(B); Ogden v. State, 117 So.3d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). We see no reason that the trial court could,not simply reenter the corrected judgment on remand. Appellant need not be present.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED with directions; CONFLICT CERTIFIED.
VAN NORTWICK, WETHERELL, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cortez Hatten v. State, 203 So. 3d 142 (Fla. 2016)…POLSTON, J. We review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in Hatten v. State, 152 So. 3d 849 (Fla. 1st DGA 2014), in which the First District certified conflict with decisions of the Second, Fourth, and Fifth Districts.1 'For the reasons expressed below,: we quash the First District's decision in Hatten and approve the decisions in the conf…
-
King v. State, 259 So. 3d 317 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)…ing that his sentence was illegal because his second-degree felony was not reclassified and he could not be sentenced in excess of the twenty- five year mandatory minimum. The trial court denied the motion, and we affirmed citing Hatten v. State, 152 So. 3d 849, 850 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (“Hatten I”), which held that sentences in excess of the mandatory minimums under the 10-20-Life statute did not require any additional statutory authority. King v. State, 215 So. 3d 1245 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (Table). Alt…
-
Kelly v. State, 176 So. 3d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Hatten v. State, 152 So. 3d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Kelly v. State, 137 So. 3d 2. (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). WETHERELL, ROWE, and RAY, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (14 total)
- Wiley v. State, 125 So. 3d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
- Kelly v. State, 137 So. 3d 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Wooden v. State, 42 So. 3d 837 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)
- Narcisse Antoine v. State, 138 So. 3d 1064 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- Brendle v. Jennings, 138 So. 3d 1064 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)
- Newton W. McLEOD v. State, 52 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)
- Sheppard v. State, 113 So. 3d 148 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)
- Ogden v. State, 117 So. 3d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Martinez v. State, 114 So. 3d 1119 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)
- Quinten Walden v. State, 121 So. 3d 660 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)