KNIGHT
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A scrivener's error in written sentencing documents that conflicts with the oral pronouncement of sentence must be corrected on remand.
[1] A scrivener's error in written sentencing documents that conflicts with the oral pronouncement of sentence is a ministerial matter that may be corrected on remand without…
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“A scrivener's error is 'a mistake in the written sentence that is at variance with the oral pronouncement of sentence or the record but not those errors that are the result of a judicial determination or error.'”
Definition of scrivener's error from Ashley v. State, cited by the court to establish the standard for correction.
Knight admitted to violations of probation in an open plea. The written judgment incorrectly stated he was tried and found guilty, the count 2 sentenc…
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.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
DELONDRA KNIGHT, Appellant,
V.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 1D2025-2323
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County. Jamie L. Tyndal, Judge.
September 23, 2026
PER CURIAM.
Appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Knight did not file a pro se brief. Following our independent review, we affirm the revocation of Knight's supervision and his orally pronounced sentences. The written judgment and sentencing documents, however, contain scrivener's errors requiring correction.
A scrivener's error is “a mistake in the written sentence that is at variance with the oral pronouncement of sentence or the record but not those errors that are the result of a judicial determination or error.” Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265, 1268 n.3 (Fla. 2003) (citation omitted); see also Williams v. State, 422 So. 3d 1155, 1164 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025). The judgment incorrectly states
that Knight was tried and found guilty, although he admitted to the violations of probation in an open plea. The count 2 sentencing form does not reflect the revocation of Knight's supervision. And the written designations of concurrent sentences conflict with the oral pronouncement of a five-year sentence on count 1 followed by a consecutive three-year sentence on count 2.
We therefore remand solely for the trial court to correct the judgment to reflect Knight's orally pronounced sentence. Knight need not be present for these ministerial corrections. See Berry v. State, 342 So. 3d 283, 283 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022).
AFFIRMED and REMANDED for correction of scrivener's errors.
BILBREY, TREADWELL, and NEFF, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Columbus Rickey Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2003)
- Antuan Deangelos Williams v. State, 422 So. 3d 1155 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025)