Espinal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Espinal v. State

816 So. 2d 723, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6024, 2002 WL 851288

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 3, 2002

DocketNo. 5D00-2051

StatusPublished

This text of 816 So. 2d 723 (Espinal 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

Espinal v. State, 816 So. 2d 723, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6024, 2002 WL 851288 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON, C.J.

Elvis Espinal appeals his judgment and sentence for the crimes of burglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery, battery, violation of a domestic violence injunction by going to a frequented location, violation of a domestic violence injunction by communication or contacting, and interference with custody.

Espinal raises seven issues, only one of which has merit. Espinal was sentenced using a criminal punishment code score-sheet effective for crimes occurring on or after 1 October 1998. The criminal punishment code was not applicable to him because his crime occurred on 11 June 1998. Although appellate counsel filed a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion to correct this error, the trial court did not rule on the motion. By operation of Rule 3.800(b)(1)(B) and (b)(2)(B), the motion is considered denied if the trial court does not rule on the motion within sixty (60) days. We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing using the correct scoresheet. See Taylor v. State, 752 So.2d 85 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).

Judgment AFFIRMED; sentence VACATED for resentencing.

SHARP, W. and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.

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

THOMPSON, C.J.

Elvis Espinal appeals his judgment and sentence for the crimes of burglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery, battery, violation of a domestic violence injunction by going to a frequented location, violation of a domestic violence injunction by communication or contacting, and interference with custody.

Espinal raises seven issues, only one of which has merit. Espinal was sentenced using a criminal punishment code score-sheet effective for crimes occurring on or after 1 October 1998. The criminal punishment code was not applicable to him because his crime occurred on 11 June 1998. Although appellate counsel filed a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion to correct this error, the trial court did not rule on the motion. By operation of Rule 3.800(b)(1)(B) and (b)(2)(B), the motion is considered denied if the trial court does not rule on the motion within sixty (60) days. We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing using the correct scoresheet. See Taylor v. State, 752 So.2d 85 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).

Judgment AFFIRMED; sentence VACATED for resentencing.

SHARP, W. and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

816 So. 2d 723, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6024, 2002 WL 851288, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/espinal-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack