You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Granger v. State

Citations: 575 So. 2d 329; 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1872; 1991 WL 29483Docket: No. 87-03041

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; March 5, 1991; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Richard Granger appeals his conviction and sentence for discharging a destructive device and conspiracy. The court identifies scrivener's errors in the written judgment, sentencing documents, and probation order. Specifically, the classifications of the crimes are incorrectly transposed: Count 1, conspiracy to discharge a destructive device, should be labeled as a second-degree felony, while Count 2, discharge of a destructive device, should be a first-degree felony. Additionally, the sentences for these counts are incorrectly stated. The correct sentence for Count 1 is twelve months followed by four years of probation, and for Count 2, it is ten years of imprisonment. The court affirms Granger's convictions and sentences, but remands the case for necessary corrections to the judgment and orders. Judges Campbell and Frank concur with the decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation and Remand

Application: While affirming the convictions and sentences, the court remands the case for correction of clerical errors.

Reasoning: The court affirms Granger's convictions and sentences, but remands the case for necessary corrections to the judgment and orders.

Classification of Felony Offenses

Application: The court requires correction of the felony classification in the judgment, specifying that conspiracy to discharge a destructive device is a second-degree felony and discharge of a destructive device is a first-degree felony.

Reasoning: Specifically, the classifications of the crimes are incorrectly transposed: Count 1, conspiracy to discharge a destructive device, should be labeled as a second-degree felony, while Count 2, discharge of a destructive device, should be a first-degree felony.

Correction of Clerical Errors in Judgments

Application: The court remands the case to correct scrivener's errors in the classification and sentencing of offenses in the judgment and related documents.

Reasoning: The court identifies scrivener's errors in the written judgment, sentencing documents, and probation order.

Imposition of Sentences

Application: The court upholds the sentences but mandates corrections, specifying the sentence for Count 1 as twelve months followed by four years of probation and for Count 2 as ten years of imprisonment.

Reasoning: The correct sentence for Count 1 is twelve months followed by four years of probation, and for Count 2, it is ten years of imprisonment.