PHILLIP BREWER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2026-05-27
No. 2026-0435
Bokor, J., Miller, J., Lobree, J., Areces, C.J.
2026 FL 6297 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2026)

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.

Holding

A sentence is not illegal under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) if it is possible under all applicable sentencing statutes to impose that particular sentence given the specific facts, even if the judge erred in imposing it.

Headnotes

[1] A trial court may recall a jury after discharge to clear inconsistency, ambiguity, defect, or clerical error in the verdict, provided there has been no opportunity for ju…

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
Key Quotes

“[I]f it is possible under all the sentencing statutes—given a specific set of facts—to impose a particular sentence, then the sentence will not be illegal within rule 3.800(a) even though the judge erred in imposing it.”

Court's statement of the legal standard for determining whether a sentence is illegal under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).
Facts & Procedural History

Phillip Brewer appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. Brewer also claimed the jury was improperly recalled af…

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.

Topics
Double Jeopardy Claim Motion To Correct Illegal Sentence Double Jeopardy

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Double Jeopardy Claim cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed May 27, 2026.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D26-0435 Lower Tribunal No. F09-32100B

Phillip Brewer, Appellant,

vs.

State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ramiro C. Areces, Judge.

Phillip Brewer, in proper person.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before MILLER, LOBREE and BOKOR, JJ.

BOKOR, J.

Phillip Brewer appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. We affirm because his sentence was legal. See Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173, 1178 (Fla. 2001) ("[I]f it is possible under all the sentencing statutes—given a specific set of facts—to impose a particular sentence, then the sentence will not be illegal within rule 3.800(a) even though the judge erred in imposing it.” (quotation omitted)).1

Affirmed.

Footnotes
1 Although we affirm for the reason stated above, we note that the record refutes Brewer's claim that the jury was recalled after discharge to continue deliberations or to act in some way that constituted a violation of double jeopardy. Rather, the jury was recalled so that the courtroom deputy clerk could read an omitted line of the verdict rendered prior to discharge. The jury was then re-polled and unanimously confirmed the rendered verdict. As this court has explained, “[a] trial court may recall a jury after being discharged to clear inconsistency, ambiguity, defect, or clerical error, provided that there has not been opportunity for jury contamination.” Harper v. State, 66 So. 3d 1092, 1092-93 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). Here, the trial court cleared any hint of ambiguity or defect and the record demonstrated no opportunity for jury contamination.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw