Victor Christian Wriden v. State of Florida

2026-08-21

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court reversed the trial court's denial of the sentence correction motion in part, finding that the review hearing intervals were set illegally, and remanded the case for the trial court to correct the judgment to provide review hearings after fifteen years for Count I and after twenty years for Counts II and III. The denial of the motion in all other respects was affirmed.

Victor Christian Wriden, who was sixteen when he committed the offenses, challenged his sentence through a motion claiming it was illegal. Wriden was convicted of first-degree murder (Count I) and received concurrent sentences on that count and two other counts (burglary with assault or battery, and robbery with a deadly weapon), all with a uniform review hearing scheduled after twenty-five years. The State conceded that Wriden was entitled to sentence review hearings at different intervals based on his juvenile status and the specific offense categories: after fifteen years for Count I and after twenty years for Counts II and III, rather than after twenty-five years as originally scheduled. The appellate court agreed that the original review hearing schedule was improper given the statutory requirements that apply to juvenile offenders sentenced to extended terms of imprisonment.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Proper review hearing schedule for juvenile offenders under Florida sentencing statutes
Applicability of sentence review requirements based on offense classification and sentence length
Correction of alleged illegal sentence through Rule 3.800(a) motion

Procedural posture

Wriden appealed a circuit court order denying his motion to correct an allegedly illegal sentence in a criminal case originally filed in 2012.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

Case No. 6D2024-2549

Lower Tribunal No. 2012-CF-010144

VICTOR CHRISTIAN WRIDEN,

Appellant,

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Orange County.

Leticia Marques, Judge.

August 21, 2026

SMITH, J.

Victor Christian Wriden appeals the trial court’s order entered on October 22,

2024, denying his motion for correction of illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida

Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The State has properly conceded error as to

Ground Four of Wriden’s motion, namely that Wriden, who was sixteen years old at

the time of the offenses, was entitled to a review hearing on Count I after fifteen

years and Counts II and III after twenty years.

Under Count I, Wriden was convicted under section 782.04(1)(a)(2), Florida

Statutes (2012), of first-degree murder without use of a weapon, with a special jury finding that he did not actually kill, intend to kill, or attempt to kill the victim.

Wriden was sentenced on Count I to incarceration for 540 months, to run

concurrently with his sentences for Counts II and III, with a review hearing for all

counts after twenty-five years. Wriden’s sentence for Count I fell under section

775.082(1)(b)(2):

A person who did not actually kill, intend to kill, or attempt to kill the

victim and who is convicted under s. 782.04 of a capital felony, or an

offense that was reclassified as a capital felony, which was committed

before the person attained 18 years of age may be punished by a term

of imprisonment for life or by a term of years equal to life if, after a

sentencing hearing conducted by the court in accordance with s.

921.1401, the court finds that life imprisonment is an appropriate

sentence. A person who is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more

than 15 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance

with s. 921.1402(2)(c).

As provided by section 921.1402(2)(c), “[a] juvenile offender sentenced to a term of

more than 15 years under s. 775.082(1)(b)2. . . . is entitled to a review of his or her

sentence after 15 years.”

Wriden’s 540-month sentences for Counts II (burglary of a dwelling with an

assault or battery) and III (robbery with a deadly weapon), both of which were either

life felonies or punishable by life, fell within section 775.082(3)(c):

Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b), a person convicted of an

offense that is not included in s. 782.04 but that is an offense that is a

life felony or is punishable by a term of imprisonment for life or by a

term of years not exceeding life imprisonment, or an offense that was

reclassified as a life felony or an offense punishable by a term of

imprisonment for life or by a term of years not exceeding life

imprisonment, which was committed before the person attained 18

years of age may be punished by a term of imprisonment for life or a

term of years equal to life imprisonment if the judge conducts a

sentencing hearing in accordance with s. 921.1401 and finds that life

imprisonment or a term of years equal to life imprisonment is an

appropriate sentence. A person who is sentenced to a term of

imprisonment of more than 20 years is entitled to a review of his or her

sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(d).

As provided by section 921.1402(2)(d), a “juvenile offender sentenced to a term of

more than 20 years under s. 775.082(3)(c). . . . is entitled to a review of his or her

sentence after 20 years.”

We remand to the lower court for correction of the review hearing times in

the judgment and sentence in accordance with this opinion. Wriden need not be

present for this correction. McCoggle v. State, 388 So. 3d 810, 814 (Fla. 4th DCA

2024) (“[W]here resentencing does not involve the consideration of any additional

evidence, and where the trial court does not have any discretion in the new sentence

it imposes, resentencing is a ministerial act.”). We affirm the lower court’s order

denying Wriden’s motion for correction of illegal sentence in all other respects.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions.

NARDELLA and WOZNIAK, JJ., concur.

Victor Christian Wriden, South Bay, pro se.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Samuel Perrone, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED