TRACI GROSVENOR vs STATE OF FLORIDA
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED TRACI GROSVENOR, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D21-862 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _______________________________ / Opinion filed July 2, 2021 3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sumter County, William H. Hallman, lll, Judge. Traci Grosvenor, Brooksville, pro se. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pamela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Traci Grosvenor appeals the postconviction court’s denial of her motions to correct judgment and sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand for the correction of scrivener’s errors and affirm in all other respects. In 1990, Grosvenor pled to, among other charges, capital first-degree murder (“Count I”), attempted first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer (“Count II”), and attempted first-degree murder with a firearm (“Count III”). For Counts I and II, the trial court sentenced Grosvenor to life in prison without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years, and for Count III, fifty years. The trial court ordered all sentences to run concurrently. Grosvenor filed a motion to correct sentence under rule 3.800(a), alleging that her sentence on Count III was illegal for exceeding the statutory maximum then in effect of either life in prison or forty years. The postconviction court denied the motion, and on appeal, this Court reversed and remanded in part for Count III to be amended to reflect forty years. See Grosvenor v. State, 308 So. 3d 665 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020). On remand, the postconviction court corrected the sentence on Count III but also amended the sentences on Counts I and II to reflect sentences of natural life. Grosvenor subsequently moved to correct the amended judgment and sentence, challenging the natural life sentence designations. She later filed an amended motion to include an additional challenge related 2 to Counts I and II. The postconviction court denied both motions, and this appeal followed. We agree with Grosvenor that the postconviction court erroneously amended her sentences on Counts I and II to reflect “natural life” instead of her original sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years. In our previous opinion, we directed the postconviction court to amend only the sentence for Count III. Id. at 667. Yet on remand, it also amended Counts I and II. Thus, we reverse and remand for the postconviction court to correct those designations, which we believe to be scrivener’s errors. We find no merit to Grosvenor’s additional challenge to Counts I and II. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED. COHEN, EISNAUGLE and TRAVER, JJ., concur. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
