From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

R.L.F. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Oct 4, 2017
228 So. 3d 633 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

Summary

affirming without prejudice where the defendant failed to properly preserve the sentencing error

Summary of this case from Leombruno v. State

Opinion

Case No. 2D16–4255

10-04-2017

R.L.F., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Carol J. Y. Wilson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Carol J. Y. Wilson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders appeal, R.L.F. appeals from a disposition order finding that he committed delinquent acts, withholding adjudication of delinquency, and placing him on juvenile probation until the age of nineteen with special conditions. We affirm in all respects but note that a possible sentencing error may exist in the actual disposition order.

The disposition order reflects that the trial court imposed a total of $200 in costs and fees, whereas the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence imposed a total of $150 in "court costs." See W.S.G. v. State, 32 So.3d 725, 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) ("If a discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement." (quoting Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) )). However, because R.L.F. failed to preserve this potential error by filing a motion to correct sentencing error, this court must affirm. See Thomas v. State, 190 So.3d 222, 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (affirming without prejudice the defendant's sentence because even though the written sentence failed to comport with the trial court's oral pronouncement, the defendant failed to properly preserve the sentencing error). Our affirmance is without prejudice for R.L.F. to raise this possible sentencing error in an appropriate postconviction motion. See id.

Affirmed.

VILLANTI, KHOUZAM, and SLEET, JJ., Concur.

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).


Summaries of

R.L.F. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Oct 4, 2017
228 So. 3d 633 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

affirming without prejudice where the defendant failed to properly preserve the sentencing error

Summary of this case from Leombruno v. State
Case details for

R.L.F. v. State

Case Details

Full title:R.L.F., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Date published: Oct 4, 2017

Citations

228 So. 3d 633 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

Citing Cases

Leombruno v. State

Because Mr. Leombruno failed to preserve this potential error by objecting or filing a motion to correct…