STEVEN SAM FREDERICK, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
STEVEN SAM FREDERICK, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
419 So. 2d 736
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1982)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Frederick appeals from an order which revoked the probation imposed pursuant to a 1978 nolo plea and resentenced him to consecutive five-year terms for burglary of a structure and grand theft. Despite a clerk’s notation which indicates otherwise, the transcript of the colloquy clearly reveals that the defendant pled only to burglary and did not do so to the count charging grand theft. The subsequent adjudication and sentence on that charge were therefore nullities and are consequently vacated and set aside. Gonzalez v. State, 392 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). The burglary judgment is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Casterline v. State, 703 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…also State v. Schafer, 583 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Carter v. State, 516 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Other probationary terms which have been described as "nullities” involve jurisdictional irregularities. See, e.g., Frederick v. State, 419 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), and Walker v. State, 382 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (vacating revocations of probation when the supervision was imposed for offenses for which the defendant never pleaded guilty nor was found guihy); Page v. State, 376 So. 2d…
-
Livolsi v. State, 451 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…t’s plea to count 1 to be withdrawn, and because the court found the allegations of count 1 do not set out an offense, the court should have vacated that portion of the order which pertains to count 1. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.170(f); Frederick v. State, 419 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Jolly v. State, 392 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Additionally, the probation order leaves a general “sentence” in effect. Pearson v. State, 371 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). The order, predicated upon two findings of criminal…
-
Nicholson v. Nicholson, 184 So. 3d 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…usts, and any other payments, made by any person, private entity, federal or state government, or any unit of local government. And specifically, social security benefits may be considered income for purposes of calculating alimony. Baker v. Baker, 419 So. 2d 736, 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); see also Boone v. Boone, 3 So. 3d 403, 405 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (considering both parties’ social security benefits as income in calculating alimony). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the court to reconsider the amount…
Authorities Cited
- Gonzalez v. State, 392 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)