THOMAS C. VAUGHAN
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.
The postconviction court's order granting in part and denying in part Vaughan's Rule 3.800(a) motion was affirmed, and the case was remanded to correct scrivener's errors in the judgments.
[1] A court may remand a judgment to correct scrivener's errors in conviction records to accurately reflect the crimes for which a defendant was convicted, even when affirmin…
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 intelligenceThomas Vaughan filed a postconviction motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) challenging his convictions in six case numbers. The po…
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 Scrivener'S Error cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Barbara Twine Thomas, Judge.
LaROSE, Judge.
We affirm the postconviction court's order granting in part and denying in part Thomas Vaughan's motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).
We remand, however, for correction of a scrivener's error. The judgments in case numbers 02-CF-8680, 8681, 8682, 8857, 8916, and 8917 should reflect that Mr. Vaughan was convicted of robbery with a deadly weapon.
Affirmed; remanded with instructions.
VILLANTI and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.