Opinion
Case No. 5D19-3396
01-22-2021
Christopher M. BRYANT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Susan Fagan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pamela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Susan Fagan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pamela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Christopher Bryant appeals the trial court's partial denial of his motion to correct sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2).
Bryant argues that the trial court erred in denying, in part, his motion to correct sentence because it revoked his sex offender probation and imposed a nine-year sentence on the basis that he qualified as a violent felony offender of special concern under section 948.06(8), Florida Statutes (2019). He contends that because he had not been previously convicted of a qualifying offense, he could not have been considered a violent felony offender of special concern for purposes of sentencing.
While we agree that Bryant does not qualify as a violent felony offender of special concern, we nonetheless affirm because the record refutes his claim that the trial court made such a designation.
Bryant also contends that because his probation violations were "technical" and "low risk," the trial court erred in failing to consider alternative sanctions under section under section section 948.06(9).However, the record reveals that Bryant's probation officer elected not to recommend alternative sanctioning. See § 948.06(1)(c), Fla. Stat. Instead, based on the circumstances of Bryant's probation violations, the probation officer filed an affidavit of violation of probation, thereby rendering alternative sanctions inapplicable to Bryant's case. See § 948.06(1)(c), (9)(a), Fla. Stat.
AFFIRMED.
EVANDER, C.J., and COHEN, J., concur.
EISNAUGLE, J., concurs, and concurs specially with opinion.
EISNAUGLE, J., concurring specially.
I agree that Bryant's judgment and sentence must be affirmed. However, I would not reach the merits of Bryant's argument that he does not qualify as a violent felony offender of special concern ("VFOSC") because, as the majority notes, the trial court did not designate Bryant as a VFOSC.