MARCEL D. THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Oral Pronouncement Vs. Written Order cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant challenges his sentence, arguing that the trial court’s. written order, finding six violations of probation, does not match the court’s oral pronouncement, which found only that Appellant “violated [probation] by .committing the criminal of*480fense of robbery with a firearm.”1 “Where a trial court’s written sentencing order conflicts with the oral pronouncement, the oral pronouncement controls.” Santiago v. State, 133 So.3d 1159, 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). The State concedes that the written order does not match the oral pronouncement. As the ■written order finds violations of probation not included in the oral pronouncement, the written order must be corrected.
We affirm the imposition of costs, as these had been imposed in the original sentencing proceeding. The court did not have to orally impose them again at the sentencing for the violation of probation.
Affirmed and remanded for correction in conformance with the oral pronouncement.
WARNER, MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Quintica Raines v. State, 317 So. 3d 1162 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021)…13 So. 2d 474, 475 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). “Where a trial court’s written sentencing order conflicts with the oral pronouncement, the oral pronouncement controls.” Santiago v. State, 133 So. 3d 1159, 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); see also Thomas v. State, 183 So. 3d 479, 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (finding that the trial court’s oral pronouncement controlled over a conflicting written sentencing order). On remand, the trial court shall correct the written sentencing order. The defendant need not be present for this…
-
Jeromee Saffold v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2021)…this opinion, with one exception: We note that the State correctly concedes error on the trial court’s imposition of a dangerous sexual felony offender designation and 25-year mandatory minimum sentence on counts II through V, see Thomas v. State, 183 So. 3d 479, 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016), and on count VI, see § 794.0115(2), Fla. Stat. (2019). On remand, we direct the court to correct these errors in the written sentences. ---PAGE 2--- 2 inclusion of the firearm points but argues any error was harmless.…
-
Adolphus Munden v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Santiago v. State, 133 So. 3d 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)