HAROLD WARD AKA BALDY BEE AKA LEROY BELL AKA GARY WARD AKA HOWARD BELL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Court reversed summary denial of Rule 3.800 motion and remanded for evidentiary hearing on whether consecutive sentences for convictions arising from same criminal episode violated Hale v. State.
When convictions arise from the same criminal episode, the trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether consecutive sentencing is proper under Hale v. State.
[1] When multiple convictions arise from the same criminal episode, a trial court must hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether consecutive sentencing is permissible under Hale v. …
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn May 1984, defendant struggled with Miami police officers over a handgun during an arrest attempt; the gun was discharged and defendant was subdued.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Same Criminal Episode cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appeal from a summary denial of a rule 3.800 motion to correct an illegal sentence.
In May of 1984 two Miami police officers attempted to arrest defendant. A struggle ensued and defendant gained possession of one of the officer’s handgun. During the struggle the gun was pointed at one of the officers and was apparently discharged into the air. The officers managed to get the gun away from defendant and he was eventually subdued. Defendant was charged with attempted murder, unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony and resisting an officer with violence to his person. The jury acquitted defendant of attempted murder and convicted on the other counts. The tidal court, finding defendant to be a habitual felony offender, sentenced defendant to thirty years and ten years respectively and ordered that defendant serve his sentences consecutively. On direct appeal1 this court affirmed. In July of 1994, defendant, relying upon Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied 513 U.S. 909, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994), brought a rule 3.800 motion. Defendant alleged that the trial court improperly ran the two sentences consecutively where the convictions arose out of the same criminal episode.
It appearing that the defendant’s convictions arose out of the same criminal episode, we remand to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing to determine the issue in the first instance, see Callaway v. State, 642 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), and for resentencing, if necessary, according to the dictates of Hale.
Reversed with instructions.
. Ward. v. State, 492 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Washington v. State, 937 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…motion. Washington was entitled to withdraw his rule 3.850 motion up to and until the lower court ruled on the merits, so long as the state did not show prejudice. See Carvalleria v. State, 675 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (citing Simon v. State, 768 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)). The state has failed to show how it would be prejudiced by the voluntary dismissal of the rule 3.850 motion. Instead, the state incorrectly contends Washington is not entitled to a belated appeal from an open plea. Whether Washi…
-
Thomas v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…conviction relief, and denied “as moot” Thomas’ motion for voluntary dismissal. The State properly and commendably confesses error, acknowledging that Thomas was entitled to voluntarily dismiss his motion under the circumstances. See Simon v. State, 768 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (holding defendant was entitled to voluntarily dismiss his 3.850 motion, where the voluntary dismissal motion was filed before the court rendered an order on the 3.850 motion, and there would be no prejudice to the State) (citing…
Authorities Cited
- Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1993)
- Callaway v. State, 642 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Snead v. United States, 513 U.S. 909 (U.S. 1994)
- Blanc v. United States, 513 U.S. 909 (U.S. 1994)
- Ward v. State, 492 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Tripp v. Killam, 492 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)