WILLIE E. BURGESS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1977-07-13
No. 76-863
BOARDMAN, C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.
347 So. 2d 1089 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1977)

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

The court held that while the convictions were valid, the general life sentence imposed was improper and required correction.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was found guilty of involuntary sexual battery, attempted robbery, and assault with intent to commit murder after a jury trial. The trial co…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

After jury trial appellant was found guilty of having committed the offenses of involuntary sexual battery, attempted robbery, and assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree. He was sentenced to a single general life sentence with credit for time served in jail awaiting trial.

The points relied upon by appellant for reversal have been carefully considered in the light of the record and briefs, and we hold no reversible error has been made to appear. It is necessary, however, for the case to be remanded to the trial court for correction of appellant’s sentence. It is apparent from our reading of the colloquy of the sentencing hearing that the trial court intended to impose maximum concurrent sentences on the charged offenses which, we submit, would have been proper. The offenses do not fall within the single transaction rule. The judgment and sentence rendered in this case shows that the trial court did not carry out his expressed intention and, as mentioned before, imposed a general sentence, which is improper. Darden v. State, 306 So. 2d 581 (Fla.2d DCA 1975). See also Darden v. State, 330 So. 2d 750 (Fla.2d DCA 1976).

Therefore, the convictions are affirmed, but the general life sentence is vacated. The case is remanded for resentencing in order that the judgment and sentence may reflect the imposition of sentence announced by the trial court in open court. It is not necessary that appellant be present in court for this purpose.

BOARDMAN, C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw