RENDERED: MARCH 8, 2024; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED 

# Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

NO. 2022

- CA

- 0953

- MR
MARVIN LEE GOODMAN APPELLANT

v. APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT

HONORABLE CHARLES L. CUNNINGHAM, JR., JUDGE

ACTION NO. 14

- CR

- 002269

- 001

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE

OPINION AFFIRMING
**   **  ** BEFORE: CALDWELL, JONES, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES. TAYLOR, JUDGE: Marvin Lee Goodman, pro s e , brings this appeal from a June 2, 2022, order of the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his motion to correct judgment. We affirm.

Appellant was indicted in 2014 by the Jefferson County Grand Jury upon the offense of first

- degr ee robbery. On April 5, 2016, appellant and the Commonwealth reached a plea agreement. Thereunder, appellant agreed to enter a- 2

-

guilty plea to first

- degree robbery, and the Commonwealth would recommend a sentence of fifteen

- years’ imprisonment.

By Judgment of Conviction and Sentence entered April 20, 2016, (Judgment) , the circuit court sentenced appellant to ten

- years’ imprisonment upon
the offense of first

- degree robbery. The ten

- year sentence was clearly a clerical

error. Subse quently, on May 4, 2016, the court amended its Judgment by rendering an Amended Judgment of Conviction of Sentence (Amended Judgm ent )

. Therein, the circuit court sentenced appellant to fifteen

- years’ imprisonment upon
the offense of first

- degree robbery i n accordance with his guilty plea and plea agreement

. Some six years later, on May 20, 2022, appellant filed a motion to correct his sentence of imprisonment. Appellant maintains his sentence of imprisonment was ten years rather than fifteen years. Appe llant attache d two judgments to his motion. The first attached judgment is titled Amended Judgment of Conviction and Sentence and b e ars an April 20, 2016, entry date. In this first judgment, appellant is sentenced to ten

- years’ imprisonment. The second attached judgment is titled Judgment of Conviction and Sentence and b e ars a May 4, 2016, entry date. In its second judgment, appellant is sentenced to fifteen

- years’ imprisonment.- 3

- By order entered June 2, 2022, the circuit court denied appellant’s
motion to correct his sentence of imprisonment. The circuit court initially noted that the April 20, 2016, Judgment mistakenly sentenced appellant to ten

- years’ imprisonment. The circuit court corrected this clerical error in the May 4, 2016, Amended Judgment by sentencing appellant to fifteen

- years’ imprisonment. The court explained that the plea agreement and the court’s note s both indicated that the court had intended to sentence appellant to fifteen years rather than ten years ’ imprisonment . The court als o addressed the apparent attempt to mislead the court by altering the record:

The confusion arises because someone has taken the second pages of these Judgments [April 20, 2016, Judgment , and May 4, 2016, Amended Judgment] and swapped them; making it appea r the sentence was reduced by the amended rather than corrected. One could wonder if it was Mr. Goodman who did the swapping, but the Court will presume this mistake was caused by someone else playing a cruel joke on Mr. Goodman. Order denying motion to correct judgment at 1. Upon denying appellant’s motion to correct his sentence of imprisonment , t his appeal follows.

Appellant ’s sole issue on appeal is that the circuit court erroneously denied the motion to correct his sentence of imprisonment. Specif ically, appellant argues that “[i]t is clear that the erroneous errors made by the trial court clearly violate CR [Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure] 59.05 a s the amended sentence of- 4

-

fifteen (15) years was entered into the court well after the required ten (10) day deadline under the statute.” Appellant’s Brief at 3.

Under CR 59.05, “[a] motion to alter or amend a judgment, or to vacate a judgment and enter a new one, shall be served not later than 10 days after entry of the final judgment.” So, a party must serve a CR 59.05 motion within ten days of the final judgment. Based upon its plain language, w e do not believe that CR 59.05 is applicable herein ; instead , Kentucky Rules of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 10.10 is dis positive

.

Under RCr 10.10, a clerical error in a judgment “may be corrected by the court at any time on its own initiative or on the motion of any party.” Clerical mistakes are “errors, mistakes, or omissions which are not the result of the exercise of t he judicial function.” Machniak v. Commonwealth , 351 S.W.3d 648, 652 (Ky. 2011) ( quoting Buchanan v. West Ky. Coal Co. , 291 S.W. 32, 35 (Ky. 1927) )

. And, in differentiating between judicial and clerical errors, the key inquiry is “‘whether it was the del iberate result of judicial reasoning and determination. ’” Machniak , 351 S.W.3d at 652 ( quoting Buchanan , 291 S.W. at 35 )

.

Herein, the circuit court indicated that it committed a mistake by sentencing appellant to ten

- years’ imprisonment in the April 2 0, 2016, Judgment. The circuit court pointed out that both the plea agreement and the court’s notes indicated that the court had intended to sentence appellant to fifteen years. Thus,- 5

-

the mistake was not the deliberate result of judicial reasoning but rather constituted a clerical error. Per RCr 10.10, t he circuit court properly corrected t he clerical

error in the May 4, 2016, Amended Judgment by correctly sentencing appellant to fifteen

- years’ imprisonment . Accordingly, we conclude that the circuit c ourt properly denied appellant’s motion to correct his sentence of imprisonment.

For the foregoing reasons, the June 2, 2022, order of the Jefferson Circuit Court is affirmed.

ALL CONCUR. BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Marvin Lee Goodman, Pro Se Burgin, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Daniel J. Cameron Attorney General Frankfort, Kentucky Joseph A. Beckett Assistant Attorney General Frankfort, Kentucky