WILCOX v. STATE (2021)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Ken WILCOX, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D20-425

Decided: February 05, 2021

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Edward J. Weiss, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kaylee D. Tatman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

AFFIRMED.

Appellant was convicted at trial of robbery and battery on a person sixty-five years of age or older. I concur in the affirmance of Appellant's judgment and sentences and would note that any claim of error by Appellant in the sentencing documents has not been preserved for appellate review. See Carter v. State, 791 So. 2d 525, 526–27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“A sentencing issue that has not been raised in the trial court either by an objection at the sentencing hearing or in a subsequent [Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure] 3.800(b) motion will not be addressed on direct appeal. The procedure established by rule 3.800(b) enables the parties to object to sentencing errors that were not apparent at the time of the sentencing hearing.” (internal citation omitted) (citing Amendments to Fla. Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.111(e) & 3.800 & Fla. Rules of Appellate Procedure, 9.020(h), 9.140, & 9.600, 761 So. 2d 1015, 1016 (Fla. 1999))).

PER CURIAM.

COHEN and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur. LAMBERT, J., concurring with opinion.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network