Bueno v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bueno v. State

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 31, 2014

Docket14-1296

StatusPublished

This text of Bueno v. State (Bueno v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bueno v. State, (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed December 31, 2014. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D14-1296 Lower Tribunal No. 09-35363 ________________

Ariel Bueno, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ariana Fajardo, Judge.

Ariel Bueno, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jacob Addicott, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Appellant, Ariel Bueno, appeals from an order denying his motion to correct

illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). After

Bueno filed his initial brief, we directed the State to file an answer brief addressing

whether the judgment and sentence accurately reflects the oral pronouncement

made by the trial court at the time of sentencing. In its answer brief, the State

acknowledges that the judgment and sentence do not conform to the trial court’s

oral pronouncement, but correctly points out that Bueno did not raise this issue in

the trial court, and we therefore do not consider it on appeal. Stangarone v. State,

94 So. 3d 652 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).

As to the issues which Bueno did raise in his motion below and on appeal,

we find they are without merit and affirm the trial court’s order denying same. Our

affirmance is without prejudice to Bueno filing a motion to correct illegal sentence

to the extent the written judgment and sentence conflicts with the oral

pronouncement. See Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007) (holding that

where it is apparent from the face of the record that a written sentence conflicts

with the oral pronouncement, relief is properly sought by a motion to correct

illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a)).

Affirmed without prejudice.

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