From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alvarez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 17, 1997
698 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

Opinion

Case No. 96-2326

Opinion filed September 17, 1997.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Leonard E. Glick, Judge.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Doquyen T. Nguyen, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, GERSTEN and SHEVIN, JJ.


Rafael Alvarez appeals a sentencing order imposed on multiple convictions. We affirm the portion of the sentence that stacks the three-year mandatory minimums imposed on counts two and three.State v. Christian, 692 So.2d 889 (Fla. 1997); State v. Thomas, 487 So.2d 1043 (Fla. 1986). However, that portion of the written sentence that orders the mandatory minimum sentences in counts two, three and five to run consecutively does not conform to the court's oral pronouncements. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court stated: "Counts 3 and 5 run concurrent to each other, but consecutive to Count 2 for a total of six years minimum mandatory." Accordingly, we vacate that portion of the sentence, remand the cause to the trial court and direct the court to enter a sentencing order in conformance with that pronouncement.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.


Summaries of

Alvarez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 17, 1997
698 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)
Case details for

Alvarez v. State

Case Details

Full title:RAFAEL ALVAREZ, APPELLANT, vs. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Sep 17, 1997

Citations

698 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

Citing Cases

Reddick v. State

Therefore, we vacate that portion of the sentencing order, and remand for entry of written sentencing order…

Jivanjee v. State

A written sentencing order must conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence. See Tannehill v.…