IN THE INTEREST OF W. S., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
IN THE INTEREST OF W. S., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
393 So. 2d 642
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1981)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. We note, however, that the court rendered a verdict of not guilty of burglary and guilty of grand theft. The subsequent written commitment order and sentence erroneously recited that appellant was adjudicated guilty of burglary and grand theft. The lower tribunal is instructed to correct the record to reflect the conviction for grand theft only. Anderson v. State, 338 So. 2d 209 (Fla.3d DCA 1976).
AFFIRMED BUT REMANDED TO CORRECT RECORD.
LETTS, C. J., and BERANEK and HERSEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. T.A., 528 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…judge by a false statement, informed the court of the contents of said reports, it is fundamental that such representations by counsel not made under oath and not subject to cross-examination, absent a stipulation, are not evidence. Sloan v. Sloan, 393 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). See also, Houck v. State, 421 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Despite our inability to consider the attorney’s representations regarding the police reports, it is nevertheless apparent that the original petitions and the amend…
-
Sears Roebuck & Co. & Chris Picardi & Kent Spires v. Polchinski, 636 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…of our previous admonition that unsworn statements or representations of counsel, absent a stipulation, cannot be considered evidence. See Leon Shaffer Golnick Advertising Inc. v. Cedar, 423 So. 2d 1015, 1016-17 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Sloan v. Sloan, 393 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); see also State v. T.A., 528 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Houck v. State, 421 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). In this case there were at least two ex parte communications between the jury and the bailiff where the bailiff ans…
-
Averbuch v. Lauffer, 516 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)…motion the trial court abused its discretion on the facts and circumstances asserted in the motion’s behalf. The motion does not affect the finality of the final judgment or suspend its operation. [Footnotes omitted.] Id. at 48. In Sloan v. Sloan, 393 So. 2d 642, 644 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), this court said: [A] party may not utilize a motion for relief from judgment under Rule 1.540(b), Fla.R.Civ.P., to relitigate issues which have been previously litigated in a motion for rehearing pursuant to Rule 1.530, Fl…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anderson v. State, 338 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)