Hill v. State, 3D01-1067.
Decision Date | 22 August 2001 |
Docket Number | No. 3D01-1067.,3D01-1067. |
Citation | 796 So.2d 564 |
Parties | Donald L. HILL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Donald L. Hill, in proper person.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Thomas C. Mielke, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before COPE and GERSTEN, JJ., and NESBITT, Senior Judge.
Donald L. Hill appeals an order denying his motion to correct sentencing error. We conclude that the sentences are correct.
Defendant-appellant Hill contends that there are scoring errors for his convictions.1 Judge Echarte correctly denied defendant's claim, stating:
See also State v. Riveron, 723 So.2d 845, 846 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
(kidnapping); Brown v. State, 682 So.2d 667, 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (sexual battery); Williams v. State, 678 So.2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (sexual battery).
What has led to some confusion on the defendant's part is the fact that the judgment erroneously includes a citation to section 775.087, Florida Statutes, for counts one, two, four, and five. Section 775.087 is the weapon enhancement statute. The citation to section 775.087 is a scrivener's error in the judgment, since the jury did not convict the defendant of use of a weapon. We therefore direct that an amended judgment be entered, deleting the citation to section 775.087.
That scrivener's error did not, however, affect the sentencing order. The judgment correctly classifies the levels of the felonies of which the defendant was convicted, and the scoresheet is correctly calculated. The defendant is not entitled to any sentencing relief.
Affirmed; remanded for correction of scrivener's error in judgment.
1. With respect to the claim of scoresheet error on the sexual battery counts, the motion is impermissibly successive. The claim has previously been denied on its merits.
With respect to the claim...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ewell v. State, 5D02-3067.
...reversal anyway, the judgment should be corrected on remand. See Bell v. State, 798 So.2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Hill v. State, 796 So.2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Ewell also argues that combining multiple sentences for multiple counts on a single page of a general sentencing order is impro......
-
Hill v. State, 3D02-315.
...appellee. Before COPE, FLETCHER and SHEVIN, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Hill v. State, 805 So.2d 61 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Hill v. State, 796 So.2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). ...