LAVON RASHARD SHINN
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.
When a discrepancy exists between a trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence and the written sentence, the oral pronouncement prevails and the written order must be corrected to conform to it.
[1] When a discrepancy exists between a trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence and the written sentence, the oral pronouncement prevails and the written order must be c…
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“where discrepancy exists between oral pronouncement and written sentence, oral pronouncement prevails”
Citation to State v. Akins, 69 So. 3d 261, 269 (Fla. 2011)
Lavon Rashard Shinn was convicted and sentenced by the trial court. The written sentence on count 11 did not match the trial court's oral pronouncemen…
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) cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
LAVON RASHARD SHINN,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D18-1074
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed November 8, 2019
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Robert J. Egan, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Nancy Ryan and Glendon George Gordon, Jr., Assistant Public Defenders, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
ON CONCESSION OF ERROR
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the judgment entered below but remand for the trial court to correct the written sentence on count 11 to reflect its oral pronouncement of a fifteen-year concurrent
2 sentence. See State v. Akins, 69 So. 3d 261, 269 (Fla. 2011) (stating that where discrepancy exists between oral pronouncement and written sentence, oral pronouncement prevails); Torres v. State, 266 So. 3d 872, 872 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (reiterating that written order must conform to court’s oral pronouncement). Appellant preserved this issue by filing a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion, which was deemed denied pursuant to rule 3.800(b)(2)(B) when the trial court failed to act on it within sixty days. AFFIRMED and REMANDED with directions to correct written sentence.
EVANDER, C.J., COHEN and SASSO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Akins, 69 So. 3d 261 (Fla. 2011)
- Mia Joy Torres v. State, 266 So. 3d 872 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)