Martin v. State

Full title: Demetrius Antonine Martin, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee.

Court: Florida Court of Appeals, First District

Date published: Jun 28, 2021

No. 1D20-3467 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Jun. 28, 2021)

Opinion

1D20-3467

06-28-2021

Demetrius Antonine Martin, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee.

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Jasmine Russell, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bradford County. Mark W. Moseley, Judge.

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Jasmine Russell, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Upon review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we find no reversible error and affirm Appellant's judgment and sentence. However, we remand for correction of three scrivener's errors. See Ashley v. State, 850 So.2d 1265, 1268 n.3 (Fla. 2003) (defining a scrivener's error as a written clerical error that is not the result of a "judicial determination or error"). The amended judgment, filed on March 10, 2021, lists count 85 as grand theft (third-degree felony). This count should be listed as dealing in stolen property (second-degree felony). Also, the amended judgment lists count 94 as dealing in stolen property (second-degree felony). This count should be listed as grand theft (third-degree felony). Additionally, the amended probation order, filed on March 11, 2021, indicates a probationary term of three years on counts 85 and 95. To be consistent with the oral pronouncement and written sentence, this should reflect a probationary term of 10 years. On remand, the lower tribunal shall correct these scrivener's errors, consistent with this opinion. Appellant need not be present for these ministerial corrections. See Walton v. State, 106 So.3d 522, 529 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) ("[A] defendant need not be present at resentencing if the error to be corrected is 'purely ministerial' or clerical, and involves no exercise of the court's discretion.").

Affirmed and Remanded for correction of scrivener's errors.

Roberts, Rowe, and Jay, JJ., concur.