Jared Cordel Clakley v. State of Florida

Summary

The First District Court of Appeal affirmed Jared Clakley's sentences for second-degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The court held that Clakley could not raise unpreserved sentencing-process claims after entering an open plea, found no fundamental error in the trial court's consideration of the evidence or victim-impact statements, and rejected his preserved challenge to a $2 cost.

Holdings

1. A defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere may not appeal an unpreserved error in the sentencing process, even when the defendant characterizes the error as fundamental.
2. The trial court did not commit fundamental error by referring to first-degree murder or considering conduct associated with the offense when imposing sentence because the sentencing rationale was based on evidence presented at the hearing and not on unsupported allegations.
3. The trial court's receipt and acknowledgment of unsworn victim-impact statements did not constitute fundamental or prejudicial error because the record did not establish that the court relied on the statements in imposing sentence.
4. The $2 cost was properly affirmed because Clakley did not dispute that the authorizing ordinance existed, applied to him, and lawfully imposed the fine.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant who enters a guilty or nolo contendere plea may appeal an unpreserved fundamental error in the sentencing process under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii).
2. Whether the trial court fundamentally erred by considering an uncharged first-degree-murder offense or unsupported uncharged conduct when imposing sentence.
3. Whether the trial court fundamentally erred by accepting or considering unsworn victim-impact statements during sentencing.
4. Whether the trial court erred by imposing a $2 cost under section 938.15, Florida Statutes, without identifying the authorizing municipal or county ordinance.

Disposition

affirmed