GARLOBO v. STATE (2026)

Appellant, Fernando Garlobo, appeals from an order granting in part and denying in part his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Garlobo has established no error in that aspect of the trial court's order denying relief. See Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173, 1181 (Fla. 2001) (“A sentence is ‘illegal’ if it imposes a kind of punishment that no judge under the entire body of sentencing statutes could possibly inflict under any set of factual circumstances ․”) (quotation omitted); see also Maye v. State, No. SC2023-1184, ––– So.3d ––––, ––––, 2026 WL 1346031, at *4 (Fla. May 14, 2026) (“Because Apprendi[¹ ] claims are subject to harmless error review, they are not the type of ‘illegal sentence’ claim cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion.”). To the extent he further claims the trial court improperly reduced his minimum mandatory sentence in his absence, we impute no reversible error. See Ranne v. State, 432 So.3d 543, 545 (Fla. 4th DCA 2026) (“Section 775.087(2)(a)(3), known as ‘the 10-20-life statute,’ gives the trial court discretion to choose a mandatory minimum from twenty-five years up to life, even if that chosen mandatory minimum exceeds the normal statutory maximum.”) (quotation omitted); id. at 545 (“If the jury ․ finds the defendant discharged a firearm and caused great bodily harm, 10-20-life applies and gives the court discretion to impose a mandatory minimum between twenty-five years and life.” (citing § 775.087(2)(a) 3., Fla. Stat. (2021))).

Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).

MILLER, J.