PATRICK MICHAEL CORDERO-CALLAHAN
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 probation condition must be orally pronounced at sentencing and authorized by statute or rule; a condition requiring equal monthly cost payments that was not orally pronounced at sentencing and lacks statutory authorization is erroneous and must be removed.
[1] A condition of probation must be orally pronounced at sentencing and authorized by statute or rule, or it is invalid and must be removed from the probation order.
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“because this condition was neither orally pronounced at his sentencing hearing nor is found in any applicable statute or rule, it was error for the trial court to include it as a condition in the written probation order”
Court's explanation of why the equal monthly payment condition was erroneous
Patrick Michael Cordero-Callahan was placed on probation with a special condition requiring him to pay costs in equal monthly payments. The trial cour…
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 Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Okeechobee County; Michael C. Heisey, Judge; L.T. Case No. 18000004CFAXMX.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Logan T. Mohs, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael Kaiman, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
ON CONFESSION OF ERROR PER CURIAM. Patrick Michael Cordero-Callahan appeals his order of probation, specifically, a special condition therein that he must pay costs “in equal monthly payments.” He correctly argues that because this condition was neither orally pronounced at his sentencing hearing nor is found in any applicable statute or rule, it was error for the trial court to include it as a condition in the written probation order. See State v. Hart, 668 So. 2d 589, 592 (Fla. 1996). The state properly concedes that this was error. Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to correct the provisions of the probation order that require “equal monthly payments.” Reversed and remanded. MAY, DAMOORGIAN and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.
2
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.