TIMOTHY WAYNE HERNANDEZ
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 may not impose a sentence consecutive to a sentence yet to be imposed on another offense.
[1] A court may not impose a sentence consecutive to a sentence yet to be imposed on another offense.
[2] A contempt judgment may be affirmed while the sentence imposed for that contempt is reversed.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 court may not impose a sentence "consecutive to a sentence yet to be imposed on another offense."”
Court's application of established precedent from Johnson v. State, 538 So. 2d 553, 554 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
Hernandez was held in direct criminal contempt for his courtroom behavior and sentenced to six months in county jail to be served consecutive to any s…
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 Direct Criminal Contempt cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Timothy Wayne Hernandez appeals his judgment and sentence for contempt.1 On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in imposing his contempt sentence consecutive to any sentences imposed after the resolution of his pending felony case. The State has properly conceded error, and we reverse his sentence.2
Hernandez was charged with multiple felonies. At a hearing, Hernandez was held in direct criminal contempt for his behavior in court. The circuit court sentenced him to six months in county jail to be served consecutive to any sentence
Hernandez would receive in his existing criminal case. During the pendency of this appeal, Hernandez filed a motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of
Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), but the motion was deemed denied when the circuit court failed to timely rule on it.3
On appeal, Hernandez argues that his sentence is illegal because it was ordered to commence at the conclusion of a future sentence yet to be announced. The
State has properly conceded error. As this court has previously recognized, a court may not impose a sentence "consecutive to a sentence yet to be imposed on another offense." Johnson v. State, 538 So. 2d 553, 554 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Accordingly, we affirm Hernandez's judgment for contempt but reverse his sentence and remand for the entry of a corrected sentence.
1Although the contempt charge was assigned a misdemeanor case number, we have jurisdiction. See Schaab v. State, 33 So. 3d 763, 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).
2Hernandez does not challenge his contempt judgment. Accordingly, we affirm it without comment.
3Although the circuit court did eventually enter an order on the motion, the order was a nullity because it was entered beyond the sixty-day time period specified in the rule. See Miran v. State, 46 So. 3d 186, 188 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
CASANUEVA, VILLANTI, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Seyed R. Miran v. State, 46 So. 3d 186 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Sullivan v. State, 538 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Schaab v. State, 33 So. 3d 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)