ANTUAN LAWRENCE SCONIERS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The court held that a written revocation order must conform to the trial judge's oral pronouncements, but the revocation itself could be affirmed based on other supported grounds.
The defendant was charged with three violations of community control. The trial court orally found him in violation of two charges but the written ord…
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 Revocation Of Community Control cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Antuan Lawrence Sconiers appeals from a revocation of community control. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the revocation, but vacate the sentence imposed and remand for entry of a corrected order of revocation and for resentencing.
Sconiers was charged with three violations of the conditions of his community control: 1) committing an attempted burglary of an unoccupied structure; 2) testing positive for marijuana; and 3) failing to remain confined to his residence on January 7th and February 3rd of 1998. At the violation hearing, the State presented evidence of Sconiers’ drug tests and testimony that Sconiers was away from his residence upon a field visit by his probation officer. In the trial judge’s oral pronouncement at the close of the hearing, he found Sconiers in violation of two of the three charges, and did not find Sconiers in violation with regard to the attempted burglary charge. However, in the written order of revocation, the trial court found Sconiers in violation of the terms of his community control by way of all three charges.
A written revocation order must conform to the trial judge’s oral pronouncements. See Jimenez v. State, 698 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Therefore, we remand with directions to the trial court to enter a proper written order that conforms to its oral pronouncements. We affirm the revocation, however, because in its'written order, the trial court listed other grounds for revocation; at least one of those is supported by the record.
Because it is not clear whether the trial judge would have imposed the same sentence upon revocation if he had not improperly listed the attempted burglary charge, we vacate the sentence imposed and remand with directions to the trial court to resentence the defendant based upon a proper order of revocation. On remand, the trial court is free to impose the same sentence.
Affirmed in part; vacated in part; remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robinson v. State, 763 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…f which were not found to have been violations in the court’s oral pronouncement. A written revocation order must conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. See Jimenez v. State, 698 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); see also Sconiers v. State, 734 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). We, therefore, remand to the trial court with directions to enter a proper written order which conforms with the court’s oral pronouncement. Because the trial court’s written order contains other valid grounds for revocation, wh…
-
Lachase v. State, 750 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…PER CURIAM. Upon the State’s proper confession of error, we reverse and remand with directions for the trial court to grant the defendant credit for time served as reflected in the court’s oral pronouncement of sentence. See Sconiers v. State, 734 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)(a written order must conform to the court’s oral pronouncements); Jivanjee v. State, 724 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)(error to impose sentence not in conformance with oral pronouncement).…
-
A.J. James v. State, 763 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…al court for entry of a written order that conforms to the trial court’s oral pronouncements. Arnold v. State, 754 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(oral pronouncement of sentence prevails over the written judgment and sentence form); Sconiers v. State, 734 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). In all other respects we affirm. Affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part. . The convictions and sentences were affirmed by this Court on July 19, 1995, and mandate issued August 4, 1995.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jimenez v. State, 698 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- MacHado v. State, 698 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)