From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCray v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 5, 2003
838 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

Opinion

Case No. 3D02-2801.

Opinion filed March 5, 2003.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Dennis J. Murphy, Judge. Lower Tribunal No. 90-38756.

Martin Luther McCray, in proper person.

Charlie Crist, Attorney General, and Marni A. Bryson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, GODERICH and FLETCHER, JJ.


On Rehearing Denied


Defendant-appellant Martin Luther McCray argues that under the oral pronouncement of his sentence, the counts on which he was sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender ("HVFO") should be fifteen years, not life with a mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen years. The defendant maintains that he is entitled to relief under Ashley v. State, 28 Fla. L. Weekly S 18 (Fla. Jan. 9, 2003).

At the sentencing hearing, the State asked that the defendant be adjudicated an HVFO and sentenced to life imprisonment with a mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen years. The defense argued that the defendant should be sentenced to fifteen years as an ordinary habitual offender ("HO").

In pronouncing sentence the court said:

The Court thinks this was a particularly violent and heinous crime. I'm going to sentence Mr. McCray as a habitual violent felony offender, provided with a 15 year minimum mandatory on each count that can be so sentenced on each count, one with the other.

TR. April 9, 1991, at 19.

It is obvious when the entire transcript is read in context, that there is a transcription error in the just quoted paragraph. Instead of "provided with" it is clear that the judge actually said "life with." We know that because the contemporaneous handwritten notes on the guidelines scoresheet, signed by the sentencing judge, states "[defendant] sentenced as Habitual Violent Offender to Life W/ 15 yr. Min. Mand. State Prison." TheAshley decision does not apply here. The trial court was entirely correct in so interpreting the sentencing transcript and denying postconviction relief.

Rehearing denied.


Summaries of

McCray v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 5, 2003
838 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
Case details for

McCray v. State

Case Details

Full title:MARTIN LUTHER McCRAY, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Mar 5, 2003

Citations

838 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

Citing Cases

McCray v. State

PER CURIAM. The issue raised in this appeal is identical to that raised by the appellant in his direct appeal…

McCray v. State

PER CURIAM.The issue raised in this appeal is identical to that raised by the appellant in his direct appeal…