Background
Patrick Michael Craig was sentenced to sixty months of probation to be served concurrently on two third-degree felony charges in separate cases. At sentencing, the trial court orally pronounced that Craig would receive credit for time served for the associated misdemeanor charges in both cases. The clerk’s notes and the judge’s signature page in both cases reflected this credit award. However, the written sentencing order and order of probation did not include the credit for time served on the felony charges.
Craig moved to correct his sentences pending appeal under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2)(B), but the trial court did not rule within sixty days, rendering the motion deemed denied by operation of the rule.
The Court’s Holding
The Sixth DCA reversed and remanded, finding that a correction was required. The court identified two independent bases for reversal. First, under Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2003), when a conflict arises between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the oral pronouncement controls. Since the trial court orally awarded credit for time served but the written order omitted it, the written order must be corrected to conform.
Second, the court relied on Grissinger v. State, 905 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), which holds that a trial court must award credit for time served in jail awaiting trial against a probation term so that the combined time does not exceed the statutory maximum. For a third-degree felony, the statutory maximum is five years under section 775.082(3)(e), Florida Statutes. Without credit, the sixty-month probation term combined with the time already served would exceed that cap.
Key Takeaways
- Written sentencing orders that omit credit for time served orally pronounced at sentencing constitute an illegal sentence subject to correction on appeal.
- Trial courts must account for pre-sentence jail time when imposing probation to ensure the combined period does not exceed the statutory maximum for the offense.
- When a Rule 3.800(b)(2)(B) motion is deemed denied after sixty days without action, the issue is preserved for appellate review.
Why It Matters
This case serves as a reminder to both trial courts and defense counsel to carefully compare written sentencing documents against the oral pronouncement. The discrepancy here—likely a clerical error—created an illegal sentence exceeding statutory limits. Defense practitioners should routinely compare written orders to transcripts of oral pronouncements and promptly file Rule 3.800(b) motions where discrepancies exist. The deemed-denied provision ensures appellate review even when trial courts fail to act on such motions.