Dunbar v. State
Annotate this CasePetitioner was found guilty of robbery with a firearm, two counts of aggravated assault with a firearm, and grand theft. At sentencing, the trial court orally pronounced a life sentence for robbery with a firearm. However, the trial court failed to include in its oral pronouncement the ten-year mandatory minimum sentence for robbery with a firearm required by section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes. Later that day and without the parties present, the trial court entered a written sentencing order including the mandatory minimum term. On appeal, defendant sought reversal of the sentence ultimately imposed, arguing that correction of his original sentence violated double jeopardy principles. The court held that the trial court did not violate double jeopardy principles in adding the mandatory minimum term to defendant's sentence and defendant had no legitimate expectation of finality in the initial sentence as orally pronounced because it did not include the nondiscretionary mandatory minimum term. However, because defendant had a right to be present when the mandatory minimum term was added to his sentence, the court quashed the decision of the Fifth District and remanded for resentencing with defendant present.
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.