MICHAEL ALLEN GUNN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 2d DCA | 2019-04-17
No. 18-0783
Shedd, Duncan, Agee
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2019)

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.


Holding

An unpreserved challenge to a sentence cannot be addressed on direct appeal but may be raised through a postconviction motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b).


Headnotes

[1] Sentencing claims, including those asserting fundamental error, must be preserved for appellate review by objection during sentencing or by motion under Florida Rule of C…

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

Key Quotes

“for sentencing errors, to raise even fundamental error on appeal, defendants must first file a motion under [Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure] 3.800(b).”

Court citing Gordon v. State to establish preservation requirement for sentencing claims.

Facts & Procedural History

Michael Allen Gunn appealed his conviction. Gunn raised a sentencing challenge that was not preserved during trial or by timely postconviction motion.…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed without prejudice to any right the appellant may have to file an appropriate postconviction motion addressing his unpreserved challenge to his sentence if he can do so in good faith. See Gordon v. State, 139 So. 3d 958, 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ("[F]or sentencing errors, to raise even fundamental error on appeal, defendants must first file a motion under [Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure] 3.800(b)."

(quoting Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562, 569 (Fla. 2008))); Young v. State, 988 So. 2d 1128, 1129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (explaining that a claim that a defendant's life sentence exceeded the thirty-year statutory maximum could not be addressed on appeal when the appellant "did not preserve this issue for appellate review by objecting during the sentencing hearing or by filing a motion in accordance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)").

LaROSE, C.J., and KHOUZAM and SLEET, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw