CHARLES DUNLAP, 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 held that a written order revoking probation must specify the conditions violated, conforming to the oral pronouncement.
The trial court orally found the appellant violated probation by changing his address without consent and committing armed robbery. However, the writt…
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 Written Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Charles Dunlap appeals the order revoking his probation and requests a remand for clarification. The trial court considered the following alleged probation violations: (3) appellant would not change his residence, employment or leave the county without receiving his probation officer’s consent; (4) appellant would not possess, carry or own a weapon or firearm without his probation officer’s consent; (7) appellant would comply with the instructions of his probation officer. The trial judge made an oral pronouncement that appellant changed his address without notifying his probation officer and further violated his probation by committing armed robbery. The written order of probation revocation did not recite which conditions of probation were violated and thus, it did not conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. We find this to be erroneous since the revocation order should have stated the specific conditions which were violated. Sing Eng v. State, 350 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).
Accordingly, we remand for correction of the written order but otherwise affirm the revocation of probation. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.
OTT, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Brown v. State, 429 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…of probation. The parties point out that the written order of the trial court fails to recite which conditions of probation were violated. We agree that the written order must be corrected to reflect which conditions were violated. Dunlap v. State, 405 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); see Evans v. State, 356 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Sing Eng v. State, 350 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Brown’s other contentions are without merit. We therefore AFFIRM the revocation of probation but REMAND the case so…
-
Lavaughn Boggs v. State, 557 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…rm the revocation of the defendant’s probation but remand for correction of the written order to reflect the court’s oral pronouncement as to the probation conditions violated. The defendant need not be present for this purpose. See Dunlap v. State, 405 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). LEHAN and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.…
-
Feezel v. State, 463 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…recite any violations. The order of modification must be corrected to reflect the specific conditions which were violated and thus conform to the trial court’s oral declaration. See Brown v. State, 429 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Dunlap v. State, 405 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). We affirm the modification of probation, but remand the case for entry of a proper order of modification. RYDER, C.J., and THOMPSON, JAMES R. Associate Judge, concur.…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- ENG v. State, 350 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)