Kemp v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kemp v. State

905 So. 2d 985, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10055, 2005 WL 1523420

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 29, 2005

DocketNo. 3D04-2893

StatusPublished

This text of 905 So. 2d 985 (Kemp 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

Kemp v. State, 905 So. 2d 985, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10055, 2005 WL 1523420 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the order denying defendant’s motion to clarify the sentencing order rendered on July 22, 2003. Contrary [986]*986to the state’s contention in its response, no evidentiary hearing is required to resolve the issue in the defendant’s motion. See Potter v. State, 769 So.2d 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

The defendant’s original motion to correct illegal sentence properly addressed the four cases in which he was sentenced: 99-21225; 99-21227; 99-21230; 99-26580. The trial court granted relief and resen-tenced defendant. However that order only listed one case number: 99-21225. It is self-evident that the trial court did not rule on the remaining case numbers-these cases were sentenced concurrently and were all properly addressed in defendant’s original motion.

We therefore reverse and remand for the court to address the defendant’s assertion — that the court overlooked the remaining three case numbers in ruling on defendant’s motion to correct illegal sentence.

Reversed and remanded.

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