OTIS WRIGHT, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 the order revoking probation was affirmed as modified, and the sentence imposed was affirmed despite a harmless error in sentencing guidelines computation.
Appellant's probation was revoked based on multiple alleged violations, including possession of cannabis with intent to sell. The trial court made an …
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 Preservation Of Error For Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The order revoking appellant’s probation is affirmed, but modified by deleting any reference to appellant’s unlawful changing of residence, failure to make monthly reports, failure to pay costs of supervision, failure to attend weekend duty at the Dade County Stockade, and the violation of probation for the offense of sale of cannabis, as no evidence was presented and no findings were made by the trial court relative to these alleged violations of probation.1 See Rojas v. State, 484 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
The sentence imposed pursuant to the order of probation revocation is affirmed upon a holding that the trial court’s error in computing the sentencing guidelines score was harmless, as it did not affect the sentence which was imposed under the guidelines, and appellant failed to object to the erroneous computation before the trial court, thereby failing to preserve this issue for appeal.2 State v. Whitfield, 487 So. 2d 1045 (Fla.1986).
Affirmed, as modified.
. Appellant concedes that the remaining basis for revocation of his probation, possession of cannabis with intent to sell, was established.
. Appellant concedes that the sentence imposed was within the discretion of the trial court pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.701(d)(14), but complains that the error in computation may have adversely affected the trial court’s exercise of its discretion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hoshaw v. State, 533 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…ITH DIRECTIONS. . At the revocation hearing, the state abandoned the charge that Hoshaw was $20 in arrears on his supervision payments. The trial court's in-elusion in its order of that abandoned charge was clearly erroneous. E.g., Wright v. State, 494 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).…
-
Dennis v. State, 593 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…e imposed upon the appellant is well within the confines of the law and, therefore, affirm. This cause is, however, remanded with directions to modify the revocation order to reflect the oral pronouncements of the trial court. See Wright v. State, 494 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Affirmed; remanded with directions.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Whitfield, 487 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 1986)
- Renelus v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 484 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Rojas v. State, 484 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)