DARRELL MORRIS
v.
THE 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.
Sentencing error claims, including those concerning written findings required by statute, must be preserved at the time of sentencing or by motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
[1] Sentencing error claims, including challenges to the sufficiency of written findings required by statute, must be preserved either by contemporaneous objection at sentenc…
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“to preserve a sentencing error claim for appellate review, the claim must be raised 'either at the time of sentencing or by way of a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a)'”
The court explaining the requirement to preserve sentencing error claims
Darrell Morris appealed from a trial court order revoking his probation and entering a sentencing order. Morris raised issues on appeal that were not …
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 Appeal From Sentencing Order cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDON, J.
We grant the State’s motion for clarification, withdraw our prior opinion issued on June 7, 2023, and substitute the following opinion in its place. In this direct appeal, Darrell Morris appeals from the trial court’s order revoking his probation and the sentencing order. As the issues raised by Morris on appeal were not preserved for appellate review, we affirm both orders. See Swain v. State, 359 So. 3d 882, 885-86 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (noting that Swain did not preserve for appellate review his sentencing error claim—that the trial court erred in entering an order designating him a Violent Felony Offender of Special Concern following the violation of his probation where the order failed to make written findings, as required by section 948.06(8)(e), Florida Statutes (2022), as to whether Swain poses a danger to the community; stating that to preserve a sentencing error claim for appellate review, the claim must be raised “either at the time of sentencing or by way of a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a)”); Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562, 569 (Fla. 2008) (stating that an appellate court may not review a “sentencing error,” even if fundamental, for the first time on appeal); see also Daniels v. State, 118 So. 3d 996, 997 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“Claims that the written judgment and sentence do not conform to the oral pronouncement must be preserved either with a 2 contemporaneous objection, if possible, or by filing a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion before filing the initial brief.”). Affirmed.
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Morris v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
Authorities Cited
- Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2008)
- Elbert N. Daniels v. State, 118 So. 3d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Morris v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)