Dunman v. State, 80-981
Citation | 400 So.2d 838 |
Decision Date | 08 July 1981 |
Docket Number | No. 80-981,80-981 |
Parties | Kevin Jay DUNMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Brynn Newton, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Edward M. Chew, and Barbara A. Butler, Asst. Attys. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
Pursuant to section 39.04(2)(e)(4), Florida Statutes (1979), Dunman was charged by an information with burglary of a dwelling and grand theft, second degree. At the time of his trial in the "adult" court, Dunman was sixteen years old. The jury convicted him of both offenses and the trial judge immediately adjudicated and sentenced him to consecutive terms of twelve years for the burglary and five years for grand theft. Dunman contends that the trial judge erred because prior to sentencing he did not order a pre-sentence investigation pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.710 and he also failed to follow the sentencing procedure mandated by section 39.111(6), Florida Statutes (1979).
These points were not raised before the trial court. They concern procedural errors which are not fundamental; therefore, they cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. Jones v. State, 384 So.2d 956 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), cert. denied, 392 So.2d 1375 (Fla.1980); Smith v. State, 378 So.2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), approved, 394 So.2d 407 (Fla.1980); cf. Gonzalez v. State, 392 So.2d 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence of appellant are affirmed without prejudice to his right to seek appropriate relief, e. g., by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Smith, supra.
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Walcott v. State
...applied the COR to a sentencing error (imposition of enhanced sentence without prerequisite findings), citing Jones. Dunman v. State, 400 So.2d 838 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), applied the COR to sentencing errors (sentencing without a PSI and without prerequisite findings required by § 39.111(6), ......
-
State v. Rhoden
...with Glenn v. State, 411 So.2d 1367 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Burley v. State, 402 So.2d 73 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); and Dunman v. State, 400 So.2d 838 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). We have jurisdiction, article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. This cause concerns the trial court's sentencing of the......
-
Monarca v. State, 81-227
...purposes. See Greene v. State, 403 So.2d 1126 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Rubasky v. State, 401 So.2d 894 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Dunman v. State, 400 So.2d 838 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). The judgments and sentences are affirmed without prejudice to appellant raising his alleged sentencing error with the t......
-
Rubasky v. State, 80-1291
...prejudice to appellant's right to seek appropriate relief, e. g., through Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Dunman v. State, 400 So.2d 838 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Smith v. State, AFFIRMED. COBB and COWART, JJ., concur. 1 Other appellate courts are divided on the issue of applying t......