Lemar v. StateLemar v. State
Michael Anthony Lemar argues, and the State concedes, that the written sentence does not conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. Lemar entered a plea to, among other crimes, aggravated assault with a weapon, not with a firearm. Accordingly, we reverse the three-year minimum mandatory term that was not orally pronounced at sentencing. See Kendrick v. State,
Lemar also argues that he should be allowed to withdraw his plea because the trial court failed to advise him of the consequences of habitualization, as required by Ashley v. State,
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.