RON ALSTON
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 imposition of a sentence without affording the defendant an opportunity to present evidence and argument regarding sentencing constitutes fundamental error violating due process, even if the sentence itself is lawful and within the court's discretion.
[1] A trial court's imposition of a sentence without affording the defendant an opportunity to present evidence and argument regarding sentencing constitutes fundamental erro…
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“A trial court's refusal to hear evidence and argument regarding a sentence constitutes a denial of due process and is fundamental error.”
Citation to Smith v. State, 268 So. 3d 831, 834 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
Ron Alston's probation was revoked, and the trial court imposed a previously suspended twelve-year sentence without conducting a sentencing hearing or…
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 Sentencing Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 5D2023-3696 LT Case No. 2012-CF-003671-A _____________________________
RON ALSTON,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee. _____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County. Donna M. Goerner, Judge.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Edward J. Weiss, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marissa V. Giles, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
August 23, 2024
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Ron Alston appeals the trial court’s revocation of his probation and resulting prison sentence. We affirm without comment his probation revocation.
2 However, we reverse the sentence because the trial court imposed the previously suspended twelve-year sentence without affording Alston a sentencing hearing. While the sentence imposed was clearly lawful and within the discretion of the trial court, the imposition of sentence—without allowing Alston an opportunity to present evidence and argument regarding his sentence—was not. See Witt v. State, 983 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). As the State rightly concedes before this Court, doing so was fundamental error that violated Alston’s constitutional right to due process. See Smith v. State, 268 So. 3d 831, 834 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (“A trial court's refusal to hear evidence and argument regarding a sentence constitutes a denial of due process and is fundamental error.”). Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Alston’s probation but reverse the sentence imposed. The case is remanded to the trial court for a sentencing hearing to be conducted before a new trial judge. See id. at 834–35. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
EDWARDS, C.J., and SOUD and BOATWRIGHT, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Witt v. State, 983 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
- Smith v. State, 268 So. 3d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)