Michael W. Nelson v. State

225 So. 3d 914, 2017 WL 3198203
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 28, 2017
DocketCase 5D17-464
StatusPublished

This text of 225 So. 3d 914 (Michael W. Nelson 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
Michael W. Nelson v. State, 225 So. 3d 914, 2017 WL 3198203 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael Wayne Nelson (“Appellant”) appeals the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Appellant contends that the trial court’s oral pronouncement of his sentence conflicts with the written sentence.

Appellant alleges in his motion that the trial court erred in failing to attach a copy of the transcript of the sentencing hearing, suggesting that transcripts do exist. However, it appears, that the trial court based its denial of Appellant’s motion upon court minutes. Other than Appellant’s allegation in his motion, there is no indication whether a transcript of the hearing exists that would show whether there was a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and the written sentence. If a transcript is not filed in the record in the trial court, it Is possible, as Appellant seems to allege, that he may have a transcript that was not filed. Therefore, we reverse the order under review and remand this case to the trial court. See Mallon v. State, 939 So.2d 198, 199 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (“On remand, the trial court shall determine whether the written sentence conforms to the oral pronouncement. If they do, the trial court shall attach written portions of the record conclusively refuting Mallon’s claim.”). If the trial court concludes that the sentencing transcript is not in the record and denies relief, it should do so without prejudice to Appellant filing an amended motion attaching the transcript if one exists.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

SAWAYA, WALLIS, and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Mallon v. State
939 So. 2d 198 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 So. 3d 914, 2017 WL 3198203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-w-nelson-v-state-fladistctapp-2017.