Court Opinion

ID: 9408305
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-12 14:05:14.971201+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:43.135362
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                          Opinion filed July 12, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                             No. 3D22-1232
                      Lower Tribunal No. F17-18009
                          ________________

                             Darrell Morris,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

                         The State of Florida,
                                  Appellee.

     An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose
Fernandez, Judge.

      Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant
Public Defender, for appellant.

      Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Sandra Lipman, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and HENDON and BOKOR, JJ.

                   ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
      HENDON, J.

      We grant the State’s motion for clarification, withdraw our prior opinion

issued on June 7, 2023, and substitute the following opinion in its place.

      In this direct appeal, Darrell Morris appeals from the trial court’s order

revoking his probation and the sentencing order. As the issues raised by

Morris on appeal were not preserved for appellate review, we affirm both

orders. See Swain v. State, 359 So. 3d 882, 885-86 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)

(noting that Swain did not preserve for appellate review his sentencing error

claim—that the trial court erred in entering an order designating him a Violent

Felony Offender of Special Concern following the violation of his probation

where the order failed to make written findings, as required by section

948.06(8)(e), Florida Statutes (2022), as to whether Swain poses a danger

to the community; stating that to preserve a sentencing error claim for

appellate review, the claim must be raised “either at the time of sentencing

or by way of a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure

3.800(a)”); Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562, 569 (Fla. 2008) (stating that an

appellate court may not review a “sentencing error,” even if fundamental, for

the first time on appeal); see also Daniels v. State, 118 So. 3d 996, 997 (Fla.

1st DCA 2013) (“Claims that the written judgment and sentence do not

conform to the oral pronouncement must be preserved either with a

                                       2
contemporaneous objection, if possible, or by filing a Florida Rule of Criminal

Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion before filing the initial brief.”).

      Affirmed.

                                        3