Cromartie v. State

¶1 We find merit in Appellant’s argument that the trial judge’s stated policy of mechanically rounding up a prison sentence to the nearest whole number (in this case, *883 from 7.83 years to 8 years originally and from 6.16 years to 7 years on resentenc-ing) without any reflection on the individual merits of a particular defendant’s case is arbitrary and consequently a denial of due process. Yet we are constrained to AFFIRM as the argument was not raised contemporaneously. See Jackson v. State, 983 So.2d 562 (Fla.2008); Brown v. State, 994 So.2d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).