Arline v. State

790 So. 2d 1175, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 9756, 2001 WL 804047
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 18, 2001·No. No. 2D00-1861·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Gerald B. Arline appeals his judgments and sentences for two counts of selling cocaine. Prior to filing this appeal, Mr. Arline filed a motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), alleging that the written sentence did not comport with the trial court’s oral pronouncement. Specifically, the written sentence did not clearly reflect the trial court’s ruling that these sentences would run concurrently with the sentences in other cases.1 The trial court did not rule on this motion before Mr. Arline filed his notice of appeal, and apparently the trial court regards the motion as abandoned. We affirm Mr. Arline’s convictions and sentences without prejudice to his right to file another motion to correct illegal sentence in the trial court after issuance of our mandate.

Affirmed.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and FULMER and SALCINES, JJ, Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Arline v. State, 790 So. 2d 1175, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 9756, 2001 WL 804047 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

790 So. 2d 1175 (Arline v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Watts v. State
790 So. 2d 1175 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)