OSCAR MOLINET-GONZALEZ
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court's written sentencing order must conform to the oral pronouncement, and when it imposes additional costs not orally imposed, the written order must be corrected to reflect only what was orally pronounced.
[1] A trial court's written sentencing order must conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence, and any costs imposed in the written order that were not orally pronounced mu…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“The final judgment however did not mirror [the oral] pronouncement. Instead, the written sentencing order doubled the prosecution costs and contained a new $50 investigation fee.”
Court's citation to Croissy v. State explaining the requirement that written orders conform to oral pronouncements.
The trial court orally imposed $100 in costs of prosecution on Molinet-Gonzalez. However, the written final judgment assessed $50 in investigative cos…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.800(B)(2) Motion To Correct Sentencing Error cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
OSCAR MOLINET-GONZALEZ, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2025-2453
[May 13, 2026]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Jeffrey Walton Hendriks, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562018CF003307AXXXXX.
Daniel Eisinger, Public Defender, and Ian Seldin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Paul Patti, III, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
ON CONFESSION OF ERROR
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Oscar Molinet-Gonzalez appeals the denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct sentencing error, wherein he asserts the trial court's written final judgment assessing investigation and prosecution costs did not conform to the oral pronouncement. The trial court orally imposed only $100 in costs of prosecution. However, the order provided $50 in investigative costs and $200 in costs of prosecution. The State filed a confession of error. We have reviewed, and we accept, the State's commendable confession of error.
Accordingly, we affirm Appellant's conviction and sentence, but remand with instructions for the trial court to strike the $50 cost of investigation and correct the cost of prosecution to reflect $100. See Croissy v. State, 404 So. 3d 419, 420–21 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025) (“The final judgment however did not mirror [the oral] pronouncement. Instead, the written sentencing
order doubled the prosecution costs and contained a new $50 investigation fee. For this reason, we reverse the final judgment and remand the case for the trial court to correct the scrivener's errors to reflect the sentence orally pronounced.”).
Affirmed in part, and reversed and remanded in part.
KUNTZ, C.J., GERBER and LOTT, JJ., concur.
* * *
No motion for rehearing will be accepted. The mandate shall issue immediately.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Molinet-Gonzalez v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)
-
Lisby v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)
-
Ranne v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)
Authorities Cited
- Molinet-Gonzalez v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)