Ingraham v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ingraham v. State

82 So. 3d 1101, 2012 WL 336546, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1403

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 3, 2012

Docket2D10-4640

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 82 So. 3d 1101 (Ingraham 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

Ingraham v. State, 82 So. 3d 1101, 2012 WL 336546, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1403 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

BLACK, Judge.

In this appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Kenneth Ingraham challenges the sentence he received as a result of this court’s reversal and remand for resentencing. See Ingraham v. State, 32 So.3d 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). We affirm Mr. Ingraham’s corrected sentence but note that the written sentence fails to conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of sentence. The trial court’s oral pronouncement included prison credit for Mr. Ingraham, to the extent that he was entitled to that credit; however, the written sentence does not reflect the award of any prison credit. See Downing v. State, 779 So.2d 562, 563 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (finding that the trial court may delegate the administrative task of calculating prison credit to the Department of Corrections but that the trial court is responsible for ordering such credit (citing Thistle v. State, 769 So.2d 1149, 1149 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000))). Additionally, the oral pronouncement indicates that Mr. Ingraham’s court costs total $675; however, the written sentence indicates $725 in costs.

Because Mr. Ingraham did not preserve these issues by objecting or filing a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), we affirm without prejudice to any right Mr. Ingraham may have to file a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Woodard v. State, 6 So.3d 726, 727 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); see also Williams v. State, 957 So.2d 600, 605 (Fla.2007).

Affirmed.

DAVIS and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

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

BLACK, Judge.

In this appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Kenneth Ingraham challenges the sentence he received as a result of this court’s reversal and remand for resentencing. See Ingraham v. State, 32 So.3d 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). We affirm Mr. Ingraham’s corrected sentence but note that the written sentence fails to conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of sentence. The trial court’s oral pronouncement included prison credit for Mr. Ingraham, to the extent that he was entitled to that credit; however, the written sentence does not reflect the award of any prison credit. See Downing v. State, 779 So.2d 562, 563 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (finding that the trial court may delegate the administrative task of calculating prison credit to the Department of Corrections but that the trial court is responsible for ordering such credit (citing Thistle v. State, 769 So.2d 1149, 1149 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000))). Additionally, the oral pronouncement indicates that Mr. Ingraham’s court costs total $675; however, the written sentence indicates $725 in costs.

Because Mr. Ingraham did not preserve these issues by objecting or filing a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), we affirm without prejudice to any right Mr. Ingraham may have to file a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Woodard v. State, 6 So.3d 726, 727 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); see also Williams v. State, 957 So.2d 600, 605 (Fla.2007).

Affirmed.

DAVIS and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 So. 3d 1101, 2012 WL 336546, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ingraham-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack