Rangel v. State
This text of 692 So. 2d 277 (Rangel 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.
Opinion
Jose A. RANGEL, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Susan A. Fagan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mary G. Jolley, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Jose A. Rangel alleges that, during his plea and sentencing hearing on July 15,1996, for a probation revocation, the trial court erroneously calculated his sentencing guidelines scoresheet.
Appellant's failure to expressly reserve his right to appeal a sentencing issue either at the plea/sentencing hearing or by way of a motion to correct sentencing pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), waives appellate review. Additionally, no fundamental error appears. See Amendments to The Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, 685 So.2d 773, 775 (Fla.1996); § 924.051(3) & (4), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996); Middleton v. State, 689 So.2d 304 (Fla.1997).
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON, C.J., and GOSHORN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
692 So. 2d 277, 1997 WL 199357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rangel-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.