James v. State
James v. State
Opinion of the Court
The appellant, A.J. James, appeals from an order summarily denying his motion for
However, the State has conceded that the record does show a sentencing error not raised by James. The State correctly provides that the trial court’s written sentencing order indicates that James was sentenced as an habitual violent offender, whereas the trial court orally pronounced that James was to be sentenced as an habitual offender. (Appendix C to State’s Response at p. 336). We therefore remand to the trial court for entry of a written order that conforms to the trial court’s oral pronouncements. Arnold v. State, 754 So.2d 149 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(oral pronouncement of sentence prevails over the written judgment and sentence form); Sconiers v. State, 734 So.2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). In all other respects we affirm.
Affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part.
. The convictions and sentences were affirmed by this Court on July 19, 1995, and mandate issued August 4, 1995.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.