LELIS ANTONIO MUNOS RIVAS
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 does not abuse its discretion in denying a mistrial motion when the State comments on a defendant's right to remain silent, and a scrivener's error in the final judgment cannot be reviewed on appeal unless preserved through trial court objection or a Rule 3.800(b)(2) motion.
[1] A scrivener's error in a trial court's final judgment cannot be reviewed on appeal unless the issue is preserved through objection in the trial court or by filing a motio…
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 intelligenceLelis Antonio Munos Rivas was convicted of battery by jury. The final judgment erroneously stated that Rivas entered into a no-contest plea rather tha…
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
SASSO, J.
Appellant, Lelis Antonio Munos Rivas, appeals his conviction for battery, arguing that the lower court abused its discretion in denying his motion for mistrial after the State improperly commented on his right to remain silent. He further argues that this Court should remand for correction of the final judgment, which states Appellant entered into a no-contest plea when he was actually convicted by a jury.
We affirm in all respects and write to specifically discuss Rivas’ request that we remand the final judgment for correction of a scrivener’s error. Rivas did not preserve this argument either before this appeal by objection in the trial court or while this appeal was pending in his motion to correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). Because Rivas failed to preserve this issue for our review, we affirm Rivas’ judgment and sentence without prejudice to Rivas seeking additional relief if he can do so in good faith. See generally Carrion v. State, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D2083 (Fla. 2d DCA Sept. 22, 2021) (holding that appellant failed to preserve, for appellate review, issue of whether scrivener's error in trial court's judgment had to be corrected to indicate he was found guilty by a jury in connection with defendant's second-degree murder, aggravated manslaughter, and aggravated child abuse conviction, since he did not object to the error before the trial court or file a motion to correct a sentencing error while his appeal was pending).
AFFIRMED.
WALLIS, J., concurs. HARRIS, J., dissents, without opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Powell v. State, 223 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
- Taylor v. State, 242 So. 3d 1203 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Hope v. State, 239 So. 3d 737 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
- Haar v. State, 295 So. 3d 327 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)
- Ruff v. State, 216 So. 3d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
- Lelis Antonio Munos Rivas v. State, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D2083 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)