Thomas W. Ayers, Jr. v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Thomas W. Ayers, Jr. v. State of Florida

192 So. 3d 628, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7973, 2016 WL 3012008

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 25, 2016

Docket4D15-3477

StatusPublished

This text of 192 So. 3d 628 (Thomas W. Ayers, Jr. v. State of Florida) 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

Thomas W. Ayers, Jr. v. State of Florida, 192 So. 3d 628, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7973, 2016 WL 3012008 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders 1 appeal, Thomas W. Ayres, Jr., challenges his judgment and sentence after entering a negotiated no contest plea to two felonies. We affirm his judgment and sentence without further comment. However, we remand for correction of a scrivener’s error in the -written sentence.

At sentencing, the trial court declared Ayres to be a habitual felony offender (“HFO”) and prison releasee reoffender (“PRR”). In accordance with the plea agreement, the court orally sentenced Ayres on count one to fifteen years and one day in prison as an HFO, with all but one day to be served as a PRR. The written sentence, however, appears to sentence Ayres to fifteen years and one day as both an HFO and a PRR. In other words, it reflects that his HFO and PRR sentences are of equal length. This is impermissible under Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000).

*629 On remand, the written sentence should ■ be corrected to reflect the oral pronouncement.

Affirmed and remanded with directions.

CIKLIN, C.J., WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

1

. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

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

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders 1 appeal, Thomas W. Ayres, Jr., challenges his judgment and sentence after entering a negotiated no contest plea to two felonies. We affirm his judgment and sentence without further comment. However, we remand for correction of a scrivener’s error in the -written sentence.

At sentencing, the trial court declared Ayres to be a habitual felony offender (“HFO”) and prison releasee reoffender (“PRR”). In accordance with the plea agreement, the court orally sentenced Ayres on count one to fifteen years and one day in prison as an HFO, with all but one day to be served as a PRR. The written sentence, however, appears to sentence Ayres to fifteen years and one day as both an HFO and a PRR. In other words, it reflects that his HFO and PRR sentences are of equal length. This is impermissible under Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000).

*629 On remand, the written sentence should ■ be corrected to reflect the oral pronouncement.

Affirmed and remanded with directions.

CIKLIN, C.J., WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

1

. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 So. 3d 628, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7973, 2016 WL 3012008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-w-ayers-jr-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack