Nodal v. State, 94-259
| Citation | 650 So.2d 696 |
| Decision Date | 22 February 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. 94-259,94-259 |
| Parties | 20 Fla. L. Weekly D479 Rigoberto NODAL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Rigoberto Nodal, in pro. per.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Mark Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, BASKIN and LEVY, JJ.
This is an appeal by the defendant Rigoberto Nodal from judgments of conviction and sentences for trafficking in marijuana and conspiracy to traffic in marijuana entered after a negotiated plea. We find no merit in any of the points raised by the defendant on appeal, save one. We conclude that the trial court committed reversible error in entering a written sentence imposing a three-year mandatory minimum sentence on the defendant because it does not conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence in open court in which a three-year mandatory minimum sentence was not imposed. The law is clear that the written sentence entered in a criminal case must conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence in open court. See, e.g., White v. State, 624 So.2d 811 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Urquiaga v. State, 624 So.2d 810 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Kord v. State, 508 So.2d 758 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).
The final judgment of convictions and sentences under review are affirmed, save for the imposition of the three-year mandatory minimum sentence imposed in this case, which sentence is hereby stricken.
Affirmed as modified.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whitehead v. State, 94-1955
...sentence entered in a criminal case must conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence in open court." Nodal v. State, 650 So.2d 696, 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); see also Verble v. State, 636 So.2d 890, 891 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Trueblood v. State, 635 So.2d 1024, 1025 (Fla. 1st DC......
-
Williams v. State, 95-2702
...court's oral pronouncement of sentence in open court," Whitehead v. State, 654 So.2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)(quoting Nodal v. State, 650 So.2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)), the sentencing order is reversed and this case remanded for entry of a sentencing order that conforms to the trial court's o......
-
Murguia v. State, 97-407
...v. State, 654 So.2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (holding that court's written sentence must conform to oral pronouncement); Nodal v. State, 650 So.2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (same). Upon remand, the trial court shall enter a written sentence that conforms with its oral pronouncement that defendan......