Patterson v. State

633 So. 2d 573, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 2503, 1994 WL 85992
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 16, 1994
DocketNo. 93-03796
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 633 So. 2d 573 (Patterson 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
Patterson v. State, 633 So. 2d 573, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 2503, 1994 WL 85992 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James Patterson appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct sentence. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

Of the several grounds raised in the motion, only one requires further consideration by the circuit court. The remaining issues raised in the motion are without merit and the circuit court properly denied relief as to those.

Patterson contends that he is serving a 50-year sentence for second degree murder with a firearm, that is, a sentence exceeding the statutory maximum. Documents contained in the record appear to confirm the claim. If use of a firearm was alleged in the charging instrument and was proven at trial, Patterson’s offense constitutes a life felony. See § 775.087(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1993); State v. Whitehead, 472 So.2d 730 (Fla.1985); White v. State, 589 So.2d 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Accordingly, since the sentencing court opted to impose a term of years rather than a life sentence, it was limited to forty years. § 775.082(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1993); Greenhalgh v. State, 582 So.2d 107 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).1

Affcer remand the trial court may again deny the motion if the files and records in this case demonstrate that Patterson was not charged with or convicted of a life felony. However, if Patterson is correct about his sentence, he is entitled to have it corrected. If the court finds that Patterson was convicted of and sentenced for a life felony, it should also delete any reference to the habitual offender statute. Lamont v. State, 610 So.2d 435 (Fla.1992).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

RYDER, A.C.J., and HALL and BLUE, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cayson v. State
638 So. 2d 1061 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
633 So. 2d 573, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 2503, 1994 WL 85992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.