Montealegre v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Montealegre v. State

109 So. 3d 1238, 2013 WL 1234658, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 5137

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 28, 2013

DocketNo. 5D12-499

StatusPublished

This text of 109 So. 3d 1238 (Montealegre 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

Montealegre v. State, 109 So. 3d 1238, 2013 WL 1234658, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 5137 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Marco Montealegre challenges his convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer, resisting with violence, petit theft, and trespass. We affirm the convictions and sentences without discussion, but remand the matter so that the trial court can correct an error in the judgment as it relates to the trespass conviction. As the State concedes, the judgment erroneously reflects a conviction for burglary rather than the lesser-included offense of trespass. Montealegre is entitled to a judgment that correctly reflects his convictions. See, e.g., Bell v. State, 93 So.3d 513, 514 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012); Lopez-Vasquez v. State, 966 So.2d 996, 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Davis v. State, 529 So.2d 1251, 1252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Given the ministerial nature of the correction, Montealegre need not be present for this correction. See Wiggins v. State, 992 So.2d 363, 364 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Lamm v. State, 871 So.2d 918, 919 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

[1239]*1239AFFIRMED; REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF CORRECTED JUDGMENT.

ORFINGER, C.J., SAWAYA and COHEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Marco Montealegre challenges his convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer, resisting with violence, petit theft, and trespass. We affirm the convictions and sentences without discussion, but remand the matter so that the trial court can correct an error in the judgment as it relates to the trespass conviction. As the State concedes, the judgment erroneously reflects a conviction for burglary rather than the lesser-included offense of trespass. Montealegre is entitled to a judgment that correctly reflects his convictions. See, e.g., Bell v. State, 93 So.3d 513, 514 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012); Lopez-Vasquez v. State, 966 So.2d 996, 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Davis v. State, 529 So.2d 1251, 1252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Given the ministerial nature of the correction, Montealegre need not be present for this correction. See Wiggins v. State, 992 So.2d 363, 364 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Lamm v. State, 871 So.2d 918, 919 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

[1239]*1239AFFIRMED; REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF CORRECTED JUDGMENT.

ORFINGER, C.J., SAWAYA and COHEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 So. 3d 1238, 2013 WL 1234658, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 5137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montealegre-v-state-fladistctapp-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack