Narrative Opinion Summary
The District Court of Appeal of Florida addressed the appeal of a defendant convicted of second-degree murder, aggravated manslaughter, and aggravated child abuse. The court reviewed motions for rehearing and certification of a question of great public importance, ultimately denying them as untimely. The case centered on the acknowledgment of a scrivener's error in the judgment which failed to reflect a jury trial conviction. The defendant argued that this error did not constitute a 'sentencing error' correctable under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). The court disagreed, asserting that such errors must be preserved at trial for appellate review unless they are considered fundamental, which was not applicable here. Despite affirming the convictions, the court allowed the possibility of correcting the error through a postconviction motion. The court also certified a conflict with another case and posed a question to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the treatment of unpreserved scrivener's errors. Ultimately, the court underscored the importance of procedural adherence and preservation of errors for appeal, maintaining the convictions and allowing for future correction of clerical mistakes.
Legal Issues Addressed
Authority to Correct Clerical Errorssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Courts have the authority to correct clerical errors in their judgments and records.
Reasoning: In the context of clerical mistakes, courts possess the authority to correct such errors in their own judgments and records at any time.
Certification of Legal Questionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court certified a conflict with another case and posed a significant legal question to the Florida Supreme Court.
Reasoning: Additionally, the court certifies a conflict with Rivas v. State and poses a significant legal question to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the handling of unpreserved scrivener's errors.
Preservation of Error for Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court emphasized that an error must be preserved at trial to be raised on appeal unless it constitutes fundamental error.
Reasoning: The court referenced precedents that stipulate unpreserved errors cannot be raised on appeal unless they are fundamental, which was not the case here.
Scrivener's Error and Rule 3.800(b)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: A scrivener's error in the judgment does not qualify as a 'sentencing error' correctable through a rule 3.800(b) motion.
Reasoning: Mr. Carrion contends that a scrivener's error in the written judgment does not qualify as a 'sentencing' error correctable through a rule 3.800(b) motion, but the court disagrees.