NORMA STOVER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Affirmed convictions for DUI with injury and leaving the scene of an accident, but reversed and remanded to correct two sentencing errors: restitution must be attached to the DUI conviction rather than the leaving-the-scene conviction, and the written sentence must conform to the oral pronouncements.
Restitution for accident damages may not be ordered as incidental to a leaving-the-scene conviction because the damages are not causally related to that offense, but may be ordered as part of a DUI conviction that caused the injury.
[1] Restitution for damages caused by an accident may not be ordered as incidental to a conviction for leaving the scene of an accident when the damages are not causally rela…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was convicted of driving under the influence with damage to person or property and leaving the scene of an accident with death or personal i…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Leaving The Scene Of An Accident cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s convictions but reverse and remand on two sentencing issues.
The appellant was convicted of Count I, driving under the influence with damage to the person or property of another, and of Count II, leaving the scene of an accident with death or personal injury. The trial court ordered restitution for the damages caused by the accident but attached the restitution provision to the sentence for leaving the scene of an accident. We construe State v. Williams, 520 So. 2d 276 (Fla.1988), as holding that such damages may not be ordered as restitution incidental to a conviction for leaving the scene of an accident, since such damages are not causally related to that offense. However, since appellant was convicted of driving under the influence causing injury, a charge that is related to the damages in question, we remand with directions that the restitution provision be changed to reflect that it is part of the sentence for that charge.
We also agree with appellant that there is a discrepancy between the oral sentence pronounced in open court on Count I and the written sentence thereafter entered. On this issue we remand with directions that the written sentence be changed to conform to the oral pronouncements contained in the transcript of the sentencing hearing.
Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s convictions but remand with directions that appellant's sentence be corrected in accord herewith.
ANSTEAD and WARNER, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C. JR., Senior Judge, concur.