Court Opinion

ID: 4312570
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-09-14 16:06:15.555137+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:07:33.651958
License: Public Domain

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                STATE OF FLORIDA
                 _____________________________

                         No. 1D17-2302
                 _____________________________

ANTONIO ANTWAN WILLIAMS,

    Appellant,

    v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

    Appellee.
                 _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
Marianne L. Aho, Judge.

                       September 14, 2018

PER CURIAM.

    Antonio Antwan Williams challenges his multiple
convictions arguing the trial court erred in denying his pre-trial
motion to exclude from trial any evidence regarding a dispute
between Appellant and his wife. The State opposed the motion
arguing the domestic dispute was inextricably linked to the
charged offenses, and the trial court agreed. The issue is
preserved for our review, see section 90.104(1), Florida Statutes
(2017), but we find no abuse of discretion on the part of the trial
court. See Truehill v. State, 211 So. 3d 930, 946 (Fla. 2017).

     However, this cause is remanded to the trial court for
correction of the judgment of conviction to reflect a conviction as
to count three for burglary with an assault or battery while
armed with a deadly weapon. The jury found that Appellant
actually possessed a firearm and also committed an assault or
battery on the victim during the course of the burglary. See §
810.02(2)(a)&(b), Fla. Stat.      The judgment in the record
erroneously lists this conviction as “armed robbery with assault
or battery.” Both armed robbery with a firearm and burglary
with an assault or battery or while armed with a dangerous
weapon are first degree felonies punishable by a sentence up to
life imprisonment, which Appellant received for count three. See
§§ 812.13(2)(a) & 810.02(2)(a)&(b), Fla. Stat. As correction of the
judgment is a ministerial act, Appellant need not be present. See
Jordan v. State, 143 So. 3d 335, 339 (Fla. 2014); Taylor v. State,
185 So. 3d 1281, 1282 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).

   Appellant’s convictions are AFFIRMED, but the cause is
REMANDED with instructions.

WETHERELL, BILBREY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

                 _____________________________

    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
               _____________________________

Joe Hamrick and Rick A. Sichta of The Sichta Firm, LLC,
Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross,
Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

                                2