SANTIAGO v. STATE (2024)

Rafael Gonzalez Santiago appeals the judgment and sentence entered after he was found guilty on multiple counts.¹ Santiago argues that the judgment does not correctly reflect the trial court's verdict ² on Counts 1, 3 and 4, and the sentences on Counts 1 and 4 exceed the maximum permissible sentence. The State agrees.³

Therefore, we reverse the provisions of the judgment that designate: the crime on Counts 1 and 4; the offense statute number on Count 4; and the degree of crime on Counts 1, 3 and 4. On remand, the trial court shall correct the judgment to designate: the crime as sexual battery (2d degree) on Count 1, and robbery on Count 4; the offense statute number as 812.13(2)(c) on Count 4; and the degree of crime as second degree on Count 1, third degree on Count 3, and second degree on Count 4.

We also reverse the life sentences imposed on Counts 1 and 4. Because Santiago was properly designated as a Habitual Felony Offender, the maximum permissible sentence on each of those counts was 30 years.⁴ See § 775.084(4)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (2019). Therefore, we remand for the trial court to resentence Santiago on Counts 1 and 4 as a Habitual Felony Offender.

Otherwise, we affirm the judgment and sentence without further discussion.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions.

FOOTNOTES

1.   This case was transferred from the Second District Court of Appeal to this Court on January 1, 2023.

2.   The parties agreed to a bench trial.

3.   The State also agreed in its response to Santiago's timely rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. That motion was deemed denied, however, because the trial court did not rule on it within 60 days. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B).

4.   The Criminal Punishment Code did not require a longer sentence on either count. See State v. Gabriel, 314 So. 3d 1243 (Fla. 2021).

WHITE, J.

TRAVER, C.J., and STARGEL, J., concur.