from the Circuit Court for Hernando County, Stephen E. Toner,
S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Joseph Chloupek, Assistant
Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Douglas T. Squire,
Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Spring Mason III was sentenced to five consecutive life
sentences after a jury convicted him of three counts of
premeditated first-degree murder (Counts 1-3), one count of
attempted first-degree murder (Count 4), and one count of
burglary of a dwelling with a firearm (Count 5). Mason
appeals his convictions as well as the trial courts denial
of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion
to correct illegal sentence. We affirm Masons convictions
without further discussion, but reverse the order denying
Masons motion to correct illegal sentence and remand for
shot four individuals at Tracy Taylors home in Brooksville.
The evenings events involved a dispute between Mason and one
of the victims, Ralph Peyton. Initially, Mason shot Ralph and
Gabriel Taylor in the home, striking both numerous times.
Mason then walked outside the home and shot Tarasha Townsend
in the head. Mason reentered the home and shot Jannie Taylor.
Although injured by the earlier gun shots, Gabriel fled the
home but was pursued by Mason. Mason caught up with Gabriel
down the street and shot him several more times. Ralph,
Tarasha, and Jannie died from their injuries.
Following his convictions, Mason received an enhanced
sentence pursuant to the habitual felony offender
("HFO") statute on Counts 4 and 5, and the trial
court ordered his sentences to run consecutively. Mason
subsequently moved to correct illegal sentence, but the trial
court denied his motion. On appeal, Mason argues that the
trial court could not have imposed consecutive sentences on
Counts 4 and 5 because those sentences were enhanced through
the HFO statute and occurred during the same criminal
"[O]nce a defendants sentences for multiple crimes
committed during a single criminal episode [are] enhanced
through habitual felony offender statutes, the total penalty
[can] not be further increased by ordering that the sentences
run consecutively." Claycomb v. State, 142
So.3d 916, 917 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (citing Hale v.
State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993)). "When
determining whether the offenses arose from the same criminal
episode, the court must consider 1) whether separate victims
are involved; 2) whether the crimes occurred in separate
locations; and 3) whether there has been a temporal break
between the incidents. " Hartman v. State, 92
So.3d 893, 895 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (quoting Teague v.
State, 26 So.3d 616, 618 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)).
Accordingly, if Mason committed Counts 4 and 5 during the
same criminal episode, the trial court could not sentence him
to consecutive sentences on those counts because the
sentences were enhanced through the HFO statute.
undisputed that Counts 4 and 5 involved different victims;
Tracy was the victim of the burglary of a dwelling with a
firearm, and Gabriel was the victim of the attempted murder.
However, regarding the other two applicable factors, we find
that the trial court erroneously concluded that the crimes
occurred at different locations and times. Mason committed
the burglary when he entered Tracys home and shot Ralph and
Gabriel, which was the same time that he committed the
attempted murder of Gabriel. The trial court found a spatial
and temporal break based on the second shooting of Gabriel,
which occurred several blocks from the home and followed the
shootings of Tarasha and Jannie. However, the State did not
charge two counts of the attempted murder of Gabriel and
presented the evidence of Masons attempted murder as a
continuing event. That theory is supported by the record,
which demonstrates that Mason pursued Gabriel immediately
after discovering that Gabriel survived Masons initial