McElrath v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McElrath v. State

10 So. 3d 1209, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 8581, 2009 WL 1874008

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 1, 2009

Docket2D08-1492

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 So. 3d 1209 (McElrath 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

McElrath v. State, 10 So. 3d 1209, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 8581, 2009 WL 1874008 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

DAVIS, Judge.

Timothy McElrath challenges his convictions and sentences for first-degree murder, attempted voluntary manslaughter, and armed robbery. We affirm his convictions without comment. However, we write to note that although McElrath correctly points out, and the State concedes, that the written judgment and sentence fail to accurately reflect the court’s oral pronouncement, McElrath has not properly preserved this issue via a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion. See Jackson v. State, 983 So.2d 562, 572 (Fla.2008) (noting that sentencing errors that must be preserved by a rule 3.800(b) motion include claims that a written order deviates from the court’s oral pronouncement). Accordingly, we must also affirm McElrath’s sentences, but we do so without prejudice to any right McElrath might have to raise the issue in a rule 3.800(a) or 3.850 motion.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

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

DAVIS, Judge.

Timothy McElrath challenges his convictions and sentences for first-degree murder, attempted voluntary manslaughter, and armed robbery. We affirm his convictions without comment. However, we write to note that although McElrath correctly points out, and the State concedes, that the written judgment and sentence fail to accurately reflect the court’s oral pronouncement, McElrath has not properly preserved this issue via a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion. See Jackson v. State, 983 So.2d 562, 572 (Fla.2008) (noting that sentencing errors that must be preserved by a rule 3.800(b) motion include claims that a written order deviates from the court’s oral pronouncement). Accordingly, we must also affirm McElrath’s sentences, but we do so without prejudice to any right McElrath might have to raise the issue in a rule 3.800(a) or 3.850 motion.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 So. 3d 1209, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 8581, 2009 WL 1874008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcelrath-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack