Mitchell v. State

861 So. 2d 108, 2003 WL 23005810
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Mitchell v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 787 So. 2d 224
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 24, 2003·No. No. 1D02-4912·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks to have her judgment and sentence corrected. Appellant contends that her sentence was illegal because it was based on an incorrect scoresheet and because her judgment erroneously cited a crime for which she was not charged. After consideration of appellant’s rule 3.800(b)(2) motion, the trial court reimposed the previous sentence without attaching a corrected scoresheet or citing the correct statute in appellant’s judgment. The State concedes that this was error. We affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence and remand for correction of the scoresheet and judgment.

AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.

BOOTH, BENTON and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

Mitchell v. State, 861 So. 2d 108, 2003 WL 23005810 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

861 So. 2d 108 (Mitchell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.