TREY HARRIS, 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.
The court affirmed Harris's probation revocation judgment and sentence but remanded for correction of scrivener's errors in the revocation order regarding the number of grand theft counts and the specific probation conditions violated.
A probation revocation judgment and sentence are affirmed, but the case is remanded for the trial court to correct scrivener's errors in the revocation order to conform to the oral pronouncement.
[1] A probation revocation order containing scrivener's errors that contradict the trial court's oral pronouncement must be remanded for correction to conform to the oral pro…
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 intelligence“remand for the trial court to correct the revocation order to conform to its oral pronouncement as to which alleged violations supported revocation”
The court cited Williams v. State for the principle that remand is appropriate to correct a revocation order to match the trial court's oral pronouncement.
Harris was on probation for one count of grand theft. The trial court orally found that Harris violated Conditions 5 and 6 of his probation by committ…
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 Oral Pronouncement cases and more on FLexlaw
In this Anders * appeal, we affirm Appellant’s judgment and sentence, but remand for the trial court -to correct two scrivener’s errors in the order revoking his probation. Although Appellant was on probation for one count of grand theft, the revocation order states that he was on probation for two counts of .grand theft. Additionally,, while, the State alleged, and the trial court orally pronounced its finding, that Appellant violated . Conditions 5 and 6 of his probation by committing one new law offense and associating with. a person engaged in criminal activity, respectively, the revocation order states that he violated his probation “[b]y violating Condition 5 by committing new law offenses.” We, therefore, remand for the trial court to correct the revocation order. See Williams v. State, 138 So.3d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (affirming a judgment and sentence in an Anders appeal, but remanding for the trial court to correct the revocation order to conform to its oral pronouncement as to which alleged violations supported revocation); see also Nickolas v. State, 66 So.3d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Washington v. State, 37 So.3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); Appellant need not be present. See Williams, 138 So.3d at 1103.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED.
LEWIS, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Green v. State, 246 So. 3d 1295 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
-
Antwuan Partee v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…e affirm Appellant’s judgment and sentence, but remand for the trial court to correct a scrivener’s error in the order revoking Appellant’s community control and to specify the conditions of community control Appellant violated. See Harris v. State, 229 So. 3d 444 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017); Leggs v. State, 27 So. 3d 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). Appellant was not on community control for count II, attempted sexual battery, as stated in the revocation order because he did not plead to that offense in his original plea ba…
-
Darling v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Washington v. State, 37 So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Jalen Shropshire v. State, 37 So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Dawson v. State, 66 So. 3d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Nickolas v. State, 66 So. 3d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Williams v. State, 138 So. 3d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)