JONATHAN ANDREW BUCHANAN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
WALLIS, J.
In this Anders1 appeal, we affirm Appellant’s judgment and sentence,
but remand for the trial court to correct the order revoking his probation. Specifically, although the trial court’s order states that Appellant willfully and substantially violated condition 10, the trial court's oral pronouncement was that a violation had not been proven. Consequently, we remand with instructions for the trial court to enter a corrected written order that comports with the conditions that were determined to have been violated. See Wasden v. State, 342 So. 3d 298 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022); Crichton v. State, 299 So. 3d 616 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020); Hart v. State, 252 So. 3d 1285, 1286 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018) (“Where the oral pronouncement of revocation conflicts with the written order, the oral pronouncement controls.”).
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. LAMBERT, C.J. and EVANDER, J., concur. 1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Buchanan v. State, 342 So. 3d 298 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)
- Wasden v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)