Raynard WILSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 1D04-1441
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
March 11, 2005
898 So. 2d 191
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders appeal,1 appellant‘s appointed appellate counsel represented to this court that counsel could not, in good faith, argue that reversible error occurred in the lower tribunal. Pursuant to the constitutional mandate of Anders and the instruction of the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Causey, 503 So.2d 321 (Fla.1987), we thereafter undertook an independent review of the record. Although we affirm the conviction, our review uncovered a sentencing error, which was not preserved by objection at sentencing or by motion to correct sentence.
After the jury returned a verdict of guilty for attempted second-degree murder, the trial court imposed a 45-year sentence, with a 25-year minimum mandatory sentence pursuant to
Appellant is subject to a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years pursuant to
The sentencing error is fundamental, but it was not preserved by objection at sentencing or by filing a motion to correct illegal sentence. In A.F.E. v. State, 853 So.2d 1091 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), this court confronted a similar situation in the context of an Anders appeal. That is, the record demonstrated an unpreserved, but patent sentencing error. The A.F.E. panel agreed with the decision and analysis of the fifth district in Washington v. State, 814 So.2d 1187 (Fla. 5th DCA), review dismissed, 831 So.2d 675 (Fla.2002), and concluded the court was constrained to affirm, because the sentencing issue had not been preserved and is not cognizable on appeal. See A.F.E., 853 So.2d at 1095.
Accordingly, we affirm this cause without prejudice to appellant to seek appropriate post-conviction relief. See A.F.E., 853 So.2d at 1093; Washington, 814 So.2d at 1190.
ERVIN, BARFIELD and KAHN, JJ., concur.
