KELVIN SIMMONS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 5th DCA | 2019-12-06
No. 19-1257
Chase, J., Wallis, J., Lambert, J., Edwards, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2019)

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

Where a conflict exists between the oral pronouncement of sentence and written sentencing documents, the oral pronouncement controls, and the trial court must correct the written sentence to reflect the oral pronouncement.

Headnotes

[1] Where a conflict exists between the oral pronouncement of sentence and written sentencing documents, the oral pronouncement controls and the written sentence must be corr…

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

“Where a conflict exists between the oral pronouncement of sentence and written sentencing documents, the oral pronouncement controls.”

Court citing Chrystie v. State in explaining the rule for resolving conflicts between oral and written sentences.
Facts & Procedural History

Simmons was convicted on multiple counts. The trial court orally pronounced that sentences on the first three counts were to run concurrently, but the…

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
Clerical Error Correction Anders Appeal Oral Pronouncement Of Sentence Concurrent Vs. Consecutive Sentences

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Clerical Error Correction cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
Edwards

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

KELVIN SIMMONS,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D19-1257

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed December 6, 2019

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County, Melanie Chase, Judge.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Matthew Funderburk, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marjorie Vincent-Tripp, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders1 appeal, we affirm Appellant’s convictions and sentences but remand for the correction of a clerical error in one of the sentencing documents. The trial court orally pronounced that Appellant’s sentences on the first three counts were to run

AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.

WALLIS, LAMBERT, and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

Footnotes
1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
2 concurrently; however, the written sentence for count one conflicts because it shows that the sentence on count one is to run consecutively to the sentence set forth in count three. See Chrystie v. State, 95 So. 3d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (“Where a conflict exists between the oral pronouncement of sentence and written sentencing documents, the oral pronouncement controls.”) (citations omitted). On remand, the trial court is directed to enter a corrected sentence consistent with its oral pronouncement.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw