CHRISTOPHER S. BUSBEE, 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.
In this Anders appeal, the defendant admitted to violating probation and pleaded guilty to 14 felony offenses. Although appellate counsel deemed the appeal frivolous, the court identified multiple illegal sentences that conflicted between the written judgment and oral pronouncement, some exceeding statutory maximums. The court affirmed the judgment without prejudice to the defendant seeking collateral relief to correct the sentencing errors.
The court affirmed the judgment and sentences but without prejudice to the appellant's right to timely seek collateral relief. The court concluded that the failure to object at sentencing and failure to file a rule 3.800(b) motion precluded correction of the sentencing errors on direct appeal, but the defendant could pursue collateral relief in the trial court.
[1] A court may affirm a judgment and sentence without prejudice to the appellant's right to seek collateral relief to correct sentencing errors, even when numerous errors ex…
[2] Failure to file a timely rule 3.800(b) motion to correct sentencing errors generally precludes correction of those errors on direct appeal.
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 intelligence“Like the Washington court, we conclude that the absence of any objection at the time of sentencing, followed by the failure to file a motion to correct sentencing error before the initial brief was filed, precludes correction of even 'fundamental' sentencing errors on direct appeal.”
Establishes the procedural rule that failure to object at sentencing and failure to file a rule 3.800(b) motion bars correction of sentencing errors on direct appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceChristopher Busbee admitted to violating probation and pled guilty to 14 new felony offenses. The trial court imposed sentences that were documented i…
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 Collateral Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
In this Anders1 appeal the appellant admitted to violating probation and pled to 14 new felony offenses. Although this appeal was presented to us by appellate counsel as “wholly frivolous” and merit-less, among other sentencing issues two of the sentences imposed are illegal and numerous other sentences in the written judgment do not comport with the oral pronouncement, which has resulted, in several situations, in illegal sentences in excess of the statutory maximum in the written judgment.
The appellant did not file a timely rule 3.800(b) motion to correct any errors. Due to the large number of errors, we think it best that, rather than affirm and remand this appeal for correction of the scrivener’s errors2, and direct the appellant that he may seek collateral relief to correct the illegal sentences, the better course is to affirm but without prejudice to the appellant seeking collateral relief to correct all of the sentencing errors. See A.L.B. v. State, 23 So.3d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (citing Washington v. State, 814 So.2d 1187, 1189 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), and stating that “[l]ike the Washington court, we conclude that the absence of any objection at the time of sentencing, followed by the failure to file a motion to correct sentencing error before the initial brief was filed, precludes correction of even ‘fundamental’ sentencing errors on direct appeal.”); Starkes v. State, 10 So.3d 1109 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (Benton, J., concurring) (concluding that because Starkes did not object at the time of sentencing, or file a rule 3.800(b) motion, this Court could not correct even fundamental sentencing errors on appeal); Collando-Pena v. State, 141 So.3d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (explaining, in an Anders appeal in which a *151 Causey order was issued after this Court identified a sentencing error, that a defendant could file a rule 3.800(b) motion in the trial court after the Anders brief had been filed, but before the appellant’s pro se initial brief (if any) is filed, to have the lower court address sentencing errors; however, as this latter time had expired, the judgment and sentence were affirmed without prejudice to Collando-Pena seeking collateral relief).
We therefore affirm 'the appellant’s judgment and sentences but without prejudice to his right to timely seek collateral relief.
WOLF, ROWE, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Washington v. State, 814 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- A.L.B. v. State, 23 So. 3d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Wilman Ramon Collando-Pena v. State, 141 So. 3d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Starkes v. State, 10 So. 3d 1109 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Bryant v. State, 124 So. 3d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)