JESUS N. ABREAU, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
WHEREAS, the judgment of this court was entered on July 6, 1977 (847 So. 2d 819) reversing the judgment and sentence of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, in the above-styled cause; and WHEREAS, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, 363 So. 2d 1063, by its opinion and judgment dated May 26, 1978 now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s judgment.
NOW, THEREFORE, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court heretofore issued in this cause on July 22,1977 is withdrawn, the judgment of this court filed July 6,1977 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court. Further, the court has considered the two other contentions raised by the appellant in this court upon the original appeal urging reversal of the judgment and sentence appealed from which contentions were reserved and not reached by this court in its original opinion and judgment stated above.
We now find that these contentions have no merit.
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence of the trial court is reinstated and affirmed. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the trial court. Fla.R.App.P. 9.400(a).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Farber v. State, 409 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…ether the penalty earlier stated is a slip of the tongue or intentional. Whether the defendant, through counsel, has supplied incomplete information to the court leading to a more lenient sentence than would have been imposed, see Williams v. State, 365 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), or, as here, the trial judge was simply unaware of information which, once revealed, led him to change his mind, is irrelevant to the trial court’s authority to change the sentence. So long as the change occurs at the same sente…
-
Brown v. State, 537 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…idence in the record to support a finding of ability to pay, it is appropriate to remand for the purpose of permitting the trial court to make such a determination. See Kimble v. State, 396 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); see also Williams v. State, 365 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Records prepared by the probation department, may, with the showing of a proper predicate, be admitted into evidence under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. § 90.803(6), Fla.Stat. (1987); Adams v. State, 521 S…
-
Kimble v. State, 396 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…). The trial court made no such specific finding. Where there is evidence in the record to support a finding of ability to pay, it is appropriate to remand for the purpose of permitting the trial court to enter such a finding. See Williams v. State, 365 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Finally, appellant takes the position that the remaining two violations were technical and insubstantial. However, the obligation to file monthly reports was specifically imposed by condition two of the probation order and fail…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Grant v. State, 363 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1978)