Maysonet v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Maysonet v. State

712 So. 2d 444, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6657, 1998 WL 307524

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 12, 1998

DocketNo. 97-1552

StatusPublished

This text of 712 So. 2d 444 (Maysonet 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

Maysonet v. State, 712 So. 2d 444, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6657, 1998 WL 307524 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

HARRIS, Judge.

Maysonet, although charged with attempted first degree murder, attempted robbery with a firearm, and shooting within an occupied vehicle, was convicted only of the robbery charge and the lesser included improper display of a firearm under the attempted murder charge. On appeal, Maysonet raises various sentencing errors: (1) since he was determined by the jury not to have been the shooter, the assessment of victim injury points was improper; (2) although the issue is admittedly not preserved, the court improperly assessed points for the use of a [445]*445firearm; and (3) the court reporter’s notes reflect that the court sentenced him to 126.75 months incarceration but the judgment reflects 136.75 months as the prison term. We affirm on the first two points, but because we cannot determine whether the court reporter’s notes or the judgment actually reflect the court’s sentence, we remand to the trial court to determine whether the judgment properly reflects his sentence and, if not, to correct the sentence.

On Maysonet’s first point, we agree with Johnson v. State, 583 So.2d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), that since Maysonet participated in the attempted armed robbery, he cannot escape responsibility for the victim’s injuries merely because he was not the one who inflicted them.

On Maysonet’s second point, since he did not preserve the error for review and because his sentence is not illegal, we refuse to consider the issue. See Wright v. State, 636 So.2d 534 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).

AFFIRMED but REMANDED for the court to consider the discrepancy between the court reporter’s notes and the judgment and for appropriate action.

GOSHORN and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

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

HARRIS, Judge.

Maysonet, although charged with attempted first degree murder, attempted robbery with a firearm, and shooting within an occupied vehicle, was convicted only of the robbery charge and the lesser included improper display of a firearm under the attempted murder charge. On appeal, Maysonet raises various sentencing errors: (1) since he was determined by the jury not to have been the shooter, the assessment of victim injury points was improper; (2) although the issue is admittedly not preserved, the court improperly assessed points for the use of a [445]*445firearm; and (3) the court reporter’s notes reflect that the court sentenced him to 126.75 months incarceration but the judgment reflects 136.75 months as the prison term. We affirm on the first two points, but because we cannot determine whether the court reporter’s notes or the judgment actually reflect the court’s sentence, we remand to the trial court to determine whether the judgment properly reflects his sentence and, if not, to correct the sentence.

On Maysonet’s first point, we agree with Johnson v. State, 583 So.2d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), that since Maysonet participated in the attempted armed robbery, he cannot escape responsibility for the victim’s injuries merely because he was not the one who inflicted them.

On Maysonet’s second point, since he did not preserve the error for review and because his sentence is not illegal, we refuse to consider the issue. See Wright v. State, 636 So.2d 534 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).

AFFIRMED but REMANDED for the court to consider the discrepancy between the court reporter’s notes and the judgment and for appropriate action.

GOSHORN and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

712 So. 2d 444, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6657, 1998 WL 307524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maysonet-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack