Evans v. State, 895 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). · Go Syfert
Search
Evans v. State, 895 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Khan v. State (fladistctapp, 2015-06-12)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Khan v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
See Jackson, 983 So.2d at 572 (noting that sentencing errors subject to Rule 3.800(b)(2) include written orders that deviate from the oral pronouncement); Evans v. State, 895 So.2d 1292, 1292-93 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (holding that absent contemporaneous objection or Rule 3.800(b)(2) motion, error in non-conforming written sentence and order of probation to oral pronouncement was not preserved for direct appeal).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Daniels v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
See Jackson, 983 So.2d at 572 (noting that sentencing errors subject to Rule 3.800(b)(2) include written orders that deviate from the oral pronouncement); Evans v. State, 895 So.2d 1292, 1292-93 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (holding that absent contemporaneous objection or Rule 3.800(b)(2) motion, error in non-conforming written sentence and order of probation to oral pronouncement was not preserved for direct appeal).
discussed Cited "see" Burney v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Evans v. State, 895 So.2d 1292, 1292-93 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (defendant did not preserve his argument regarding the discrepancy between the trial court’s oral pronouncement of sentence, written sentence, and order on probation with either a contemporaneous objection or a rule 3.800 motion).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ryan EVANS, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
1D04-3502.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Mar 31, 2005.
895 So. 2d 1292
Per Curiam.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and David A. Davis, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Charlie Crist, Attorney General and Sherri T. Rollison, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Ryan Evans appeals his conviction and sentence for possession of cocaine. Appellant argues that there is a discrepancy between the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence, written sentence, and order on probation.[1] The record supports appellant's contention, and the State concedes that there is a discrepancy.

At his sentencing hearing, the trial court stated that appellant was sentenced to eight months in the county jail followed by eight months of substance abuse probation. The written judgment and sentence states that the trial court imposed an eighteen month prison term to be followed by eight months of probation. The order of probation states that appellant is to be on probation for eighteen months. While such discrepancies clearly constitute a sentencing error, see Hudson v. State, 772 So.2d 614 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), appellant did not preserve the issue below with either a contemporaneous objection or Rule 3.800(b) motion.[2]

Therefore, we may not address this sentencing error on direct appeal. See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89, 98 (Fla.2000) (holding that unpreserved sentencing errors cannot be raised on appeal after the enactment of the 1999 amendments to Rule 3.800(b)); Jones v. State, 876 So.2d[*1293] 642, 645 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (stating that the court could not address the unpreserved sentencing error, but that this determination was "without prejudice to the Appellant's right to seek collateral relief"). Accordingly, the judgment and sentence below is AFFIRMED.

WEBSTER, BENTON AND POLSTON, JJ., concur.

1 We reject appellant's argument that the trial court reversibly erred in admitting certain evidence without further comment.
2 In addition to the discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and written sentence, the apparent scrivener's error in the order on probation is an error that should have been raised in a Rule 3.800(b) motion. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800, Court Commentary, 1999 Amendments.