Kendrick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kendrick v. State

591 So. 2d 671, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 12923, 1991 WL 275557

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 27, 1991

DocketNo. 90-02668

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 591 So. 2d 671 (Kendrick 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

Kendrick v. State, 591 So. 2d 671, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 12923, 1991 WL 275557 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

RYDER, Acting Chief Judge.

Anthony Jerome Kendrick appeals from his conviction and sentence for the sale of cocaine. Appellant raises two points on appeal. We find merit in his first point that the trial court erred in sentencing him to a ten year minimum sentence under the drug trafficking law.

The record reveals that the trial judge intended to sentence appellant as a habitual violent felony offender. The sentencing form reflects a check mark for the imposition of the minimum mandatory provision for drug trafficking under Section 893.-135(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1989). The judgment shows that appellant’s conviction was for a second degree felony, and is not one to which the minimum mandatory applies. The written sentence does not conform to the judge’s oral pronouncements and requires reversal so that the written sentence may conform to the oral pronouncement. Williams v. State, 542 So.2d 479 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Although we affirm the judgment of guilt, we set aside the sentence imposed herein and remand for further proceedings in regard thereto. Branam v. State, 514 So.2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

Reversed and remanded with directions.

FRANK and HALL, JJ., concur.

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

RYDER, Acting Chief Judge.

Anthony Jerome Kendrick appeals from his conviction and sentence for the sale of cocaine. Appellant raises two points on appeal. We find merit in his first point that the trial court erred in sentencing him to a ten year minimum sentence under the drug trafficking law.

The record reveals that the trial judge intended to sentence appellant as a habitual violent felony offender. The sentencing form reflects a check mark for the imposition of the minimum mandatory provision for drug trafficking under Section 893.-135(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1989). The judgment shows that appellant’s conviction was for a second degree felony, and is not one to which the minimum mandatory applies. The written sentence does not conform to the judge’s oral pronouncements and requires reversal so that the written sentence may conform to the oral pronouncement. Williams v. State, 542 So.2d 479 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Although we affirm the judgment of guilt, we set aside the sentence imposed herein and remand for further proceedings in regard thereto. Branam v. State, 514 So.2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

Reversed and remanded with directions.

FRANK and HALL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

591 So. 2d 671, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 12923, 1991 WL 275557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kendrick-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack