CHARLES LARRY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Scrivener'S Error cases and more on FLexlaw
JOANOS, Chief Judge.
Appellant seeks review of his written judgment and sentence imposed at the re-sentencing conducted in compliance with this court’s mandate. At the resentencing proceeding, the trial court orally imposed concurrent 40-year sentences, and granted credit for five years and one hundred fourteen days time served. However, the written sentencing documents reflect credit for four years and seventy-five days time served. Appellant contends the sentence must be corrected to show the exact number of days of credit to which he is entitled. The state agrees that the written sentence must be remanded to be conformed to the oral pronouncement.
Accordingly, this cause is remanded for correction of the scrivener’s error on the sentencing documents, so as to conform them to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. See Jeffrey v. State, 456 So. 2d 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
WIGGINTON and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vermon T. Donald v. State, 613 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…and has been sentenced to an extended term in this sentence in accordance with the provisions of F.S. 775.084.” It is a settled rule of law that the written judgment and sentence must conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. Larry v. State, 590 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Frederickson v. State, 585 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Moreover, when a cause is remanded for resentenc-ing, the trial court is not authorized to impose a sentence that does not comport with the remand instructions. Larry v.…
Authorities Cited
- Archibald Scott Jeffrey v. State, 456 So. 2d 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)