AL LEGETT BURGESS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Appellant's aggravated sentences and sexual predator designation were affirmed, but the case was remanded to correct the written order's incorrect statutory citation for the sexual battery conviction.
[1] A scrivener's error in a written sentencing order identifying the wrong statutory provision for a criminal conviction may be corrected on remand without affecting the und…
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 intelligence“The written order mistakenly based the designation on a conviction for sexual battery upon a child under section 794.011(2)(a). In fact, appellant was convicted of armed sexual battery on a person over twelve but under eighteen under section 794.011(4)(a).”
The court's explanation of the scrivener's error requiring remand
Appellant was convicted of kidnapping with a deadly weapon, sexual battery with a deadly weapon, and aggravated battery with a deadly weapon. He recei…
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 Sexual Predator Designation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals his aggravated sentences of life in prison for kidnapping with a deadly weapon and sexual battery with a deadly weapon as well as his designation as a sexual predator. Although appellant was also sentenced to thirty years for aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, he does not challenge that sentence. Appellant raises five issues on appeal. We find them all to be without merit. However, we remand for the trial court to correct a scrivener’s error in the basis for designating appellant a sexual predator. The written order mistakenly based the designation on a conviction for sexual battery upon a child under section 794.011(2)(a). In fact, appellant was convicted of armed sexual battery on a person over twelve but under eighteen under section 794.011(4)(a). As such, we remand for correction of this scrivener’s error to reflect the correct offense that formed the basis for the sexual predator designation.
Affirmed and remanded. DAMOORGIAN, LEVINE and KUNTZ, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.