GLEN L. VENUTI, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
COBB, Judge.
In this case the trial court, in imposing a three year sentence for the offense of possession of burglary tools, pronounced that the sentence was to be served concurrently with a prior sentence that appellant had received in Orange County. This intended provision, however, was not incorporated in the written judgment and sentence. The State concedes that oral pronouncements of sentence generally are controlling in such situations and that apparently a clerical error occurred in the instant case. See Landry v. State, 414 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) and Pelfrey v. State, 409 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). The appellant’s remaining point on appeal is without merit.
The judgment below is affirmed and the cause is remanded for correction of the written sentence.
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr. and CO-WART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Wilkins v. State, 543 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…hough the trial court verbally pronounced a guideline sentence of five years in prison for the aggravated assault conviction, the written sentence form reflects imposition of a 27-year sentence for this offense. As we pointed out in Venuti v. State, 437 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), verbal pronouncements prevail over clerical errors. In Ven-uti, as here, the state conceded the written sentence was in error. Absent that concession, such conflict would require a factual resolution by the trial court, assuming…
-
Avery v. State, 543 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…in the written orders, and that the written orders thus reflect a clerical error. An oral pronouncement at sentencing is controlling when a clerical error causes the written order to be inconsistent with the oral pronouncement. See Venuti v. State, 437 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). We therefore remand the written probation orders to the trial court with directions that they be corrected to reflect that they run concurrently, in accordance with the oral pronouncement. Judgments AFFIRMED. Probation orders…
-
Lester v. State, 563 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…7 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Marchand v. State, 546 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Wilkins v. State, 543 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 554 So. 2d 1170 (Fla.1989); Mott v. State, 489 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Venuti v. State, 437 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). In the instant case, the state has not conceded that all provisions of the written sentence were in error, and, therefore, the orally pronounced sentence cannot be substituted for the written order. Absent concession by the stat…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pelfrey v. State, 409 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Rosen v. The Tobi Co., Inc., 414 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)