From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matthews v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Apr 19, 1991
578 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 89-02830.

April 19, 1991.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Richard A. Lazzara, Judge.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Stephen Krosschell, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corces, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.


We reverse appellant's sentences for the third-degree felonies in case numbers 89-9328, 89-9450, and 89-9451. The written sentences do not comport with the trial court's oral pronouncement that appellant would be sentenced to concurrent suspended terms of five years' imprisonment, to be followed by five years' probation. Moreover, the written sentences exceed the ten-year statutory maximum for a third-degree felony, enhanced pursuant to the habitual offender statute. See § 775.084(4)(a)3, Fla. Stat. (1989). On remand, the trial court shall correct the written sentences to comport with its oral pronouncement.

Appellant's remaining point was not preserved for review by objection in the trial court.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for correction of written sentences.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PARKER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matthews v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Apr 19, 1991
578 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

Matthews v. State

Case Details

Full title:DWIGHT MATTHEWS, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Apr 19, 1991

Citations

578 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

Mearns v. State

The sentencing documents in that case reflect a sentence of 113.4 months and must be corrected to conform…