Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

866 So. 2d 120

Docket No. 4D03-967.

State v. Woodard

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Brenda WOODARD, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 11, 2004.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2004-02-11

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently March 2013

9 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Reduction and Modification. A court may reduce or modify to include any of the provisions of chapter 948, Florida Statutes, a legal sentence imposed by it within 60 days after the imposition. . . .”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including 927 So. 2d 1035 - State v. Grandstaff, 961 So. 2d 1099 - McCormick v. State

“It is the sole responsibility of the movant to see that the motion is scheduled for a hearing within the window period.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 972 So. 2d 307 - Childers v. State

Relies on 511 So. 2d 688 - Grosse v. State · State v. Blue · Hussey v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-02-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*121 Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Linda Harrison, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

¶2Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Michael Antinori, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

¶3OFTEDAL, RICHARD L., Associate Judge.

¶4The State appeals an order of the trial judge granting Brenda Woodard's motion to modify her jail sentence.

¶5On October 22, 2002, Woodard pled no contest to two felony counts of possession of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia. She was sentenced that same day on both counts to eight months in jail with credit for forty-five days time served. Her pro se motion to modify sentence was mailed in November 2002, within the sixty-day window period for filing as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c).[1] Although Woodard's motion was timely filed, no action was taken or hearing held until February 18, 2002, at which time the trial court reduced her sentence to time served.

¶6The State correctly argues that the trial court lost jurisdiction when it failed to reduce or modify Woodard's sentence within sixty days of imposition of sentence. See Hussey v. State,739 So.2d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). This is so even where, as in this case, the "motion sat in the court file while the time period expired." Grosse v. State,511 So.2d 688, 689 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); see also State v. Blue,603 So.2d 648, 649 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)("It is irrelevant that the motion to mitigate sentence was made within the sixty-day period."). It is the sole responsibility of the movant to see that the motion is scheduled for a hearing within the window period.

¶7Just as the Fifth District did in Blue, we elect to treat the State's appeal as a petition for common-law writ of certiorari, inasmuch as it alleges that the trial court acted in excess of its jurisdiction. See id. Accordingly, the petition is granted and the order granting Woodard's motion to modify her sentence is quashed.

¶8PETITION GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED.

¶9POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.

NOTES

¶10[1] Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) provides that, in the absence of a timely appeal, "[a] court may reduce or modify ... a legal sentence imposed by it within 60 days after the imposition."

/866/so2d/120 · .json · Public domain