Legal Opinion · Dissent

Cromartie v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided August 25, 2011No. SC09-1868Published

1DissentCanady, C.J.

Because I conclude that the comments of the sentencing judge which are at issue here do not constitute fundamental error, I dissent. The minor impact of the sentencing judge’s “rounding-up” methodology on Cromartie’s sentence does not rise to the level of error “that affects the determination of the length of the sentence such that the interests of justice will not be served if the error remains uncorrected.” Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89, 100 (Fla.2000).

“We have warned that the fundamental error doctrine applies only rarely,” Harrell v. State, 894 So.2d 935, 941 (Fla.2005)— that is, “where a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Maddox v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2000
  2. Harrell v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
  3. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1988
  4. Cromartie v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API