holding that a defendant need not be present at- resentencing if the error to be corrected is purely ministerial or clerical, and involves no exercise of the court’s discretion; ministerial or clerical corrections include changing the written sentence to conform to the oral pronouncement
How later courts described this case
- holding that a defendant need not be present at- resentencing if the error to be corrected is purely ministerial or clerical, and involves no exercise of the court’s discretion; ministerial or clerical corrections include changing the written sentence to conform to the oral pronouncement
- “[A] defendant need not be present at resentencing if the error to be corrected is ‘purely ministerial’ or clerical, and involves no exercise of the court’s discretion.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Abrogated implicitly by Ronald Williams v. State of Florida, 41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 73 (2016)
Id. at 993. Williams effectively abrogated Walton ’s holding that trial courts are authorized to “stack” mandatory minimum terms under the 10-20-Life statute even when the defendant did not discharge a firearm.
The opinion
BENTON, C.J.,
concurring in result.
I concur in the court’s judgment insofar as it affirms the appellant’s convictions. I agree that the sentences pronounced below must be reversed because the defendant was not present, and did not waive his right to be present, at sentencing.