Conroy v. State, 2D04-3589.
| Decision Date | 21 July 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D04-3589.,2D04-3589. |
| Parties | William CONROY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
This case involves a sentencing error which requires our reversal. We do so because the trial court failed to timely correct the error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2).
William Conroy pleaded guilty to two counts of child neglect before Circuit Judge Jack Espinosa, Jr., at a hearing on July 25, 2003. Sentencing did not take place until April 30, 2004, when a sentencing hearing was conducted before Circuit Judge Wayne S. Timmerman. There is nothing in the record to suggest that Judge Espinosa could not have conducted the sentencing hearing.
Conroy filed a 3.800(b)(2) motion with the trial court on February 18, 2005, contending that he was prejudiced because (1) his plea was accepted by one judge and he was sentenced by another and (2) he was sentenced under an incorrectly scored and inaccurately calculated Criminal Punishment Code (CPC) scoresheet on count one, and under the wrong sentencing guidelines on count two. The trial court granted Conroy's motion and entered its order on April 25, 2005. This was error.
Rule 3.800(b)(2) requires the trial court to "resolve this motion in accordance with the procedures in subdivision (b)(1)(B)," which states,
The trial court's order was entered sixty-seven days after the motion was filed. Therefore, although the State correctly conceded error in the court and the court attempted to correct the error, it was without jurisdiction to do so on April 25, 2005. Hansell v. State, 879 So.2d 646 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Moreover, while the sixty-day period may be extended for good cause, it cannot be extended after it has already run. McGuire v. State, 779 So.2d 571 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
The State concedes that Conroy is entitled to be resentenced using the correct scoresheets and guidelines. Further, we agree with Conroy that, without a showing of necessity, it is error to permit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Griffin v. State
...expired, the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to address the merits of the motion or enter an amended sentence. See Conroy v. State, 933 So.2d 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).3 We therefore reverse the amended sentence. However we also conclude that the initial sentence, identical in terms to the a......
-
Williams v. State , 2D09–2264.
...of time to rule on the motion before the sixty-day period expired. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B); Conroy v. State, 933 So.2d 687, 688 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Jackson v. State, 793 So.2d 117, 118 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Thus, the order granting relief and the new judgment and sentenc......