PABLO PEREZ, 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 the written judgment and sentence form must be corrected to specify the exact degree of the crimes to which the appellant pled nolo contendere, as this information can be supplied by reference to the record.
[1] A court's written judgment and sentence must state the exact crime for which a defendant is sentenced.
[2] An omission in a written judgment and sentence may be supplied by reference to the record.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant pled nolo contendere to burglary and grand theft. The information did not specify the degree of these offenses. The trial court accepted the…
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 Nolo Contendere Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHOONOVER, Judge.
The appellant, Pablo Perez, appeals from the judgments and sentences entered against him. His sole contention on appeal is that the judgment and sentence form entered in this case must be corrected to show the exact degree of the crimes to which he pled nolo contendere. We agree.
Appellant was charged by information with burglary in violation of section 810.02, Florida Statutes (1983), and grand theft in violation of section 812.014, Florida Statutes (1983). The information did not specify the degree of either offense. The trial court accepted appellant’s plea of nolo con-tendere to the charges, adjudicated him guilty, and then sentenced him to the time he had served in jail awaiting trial. The court’s written judgment and sentence form failed to refer to the degree of either crime. This appeal timely followed.
A court’s written judgment and sentence must not vary from its oral pronouncement, Yates v. State, 429 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), and must state the exact crime for which a defendant is sentenced. Caston v. State, 58 So. 2d 694 (Fla.1952). An omission however may, as in this case, be supplied by reference to the record. Caston. Although the specific sections of the burglary and theft statute in question were not referred to in the information, the factual allegations contained therein indicated that appellant was charged with committing a burglary in violation of section 810.02(3), a second degree felony, and with committing grand theft in violation of section 812.014(2)(b)l, a third degree felony. At the plea hearing, appellant pled nolo contendere to those allegations and the trial court orally adjudicated him guilty of those offenses. We must, therefore, remand. Upon remand, the judgments and sentences entered by the trial court should be corrected to show the degree of the crimes for which appellant was sentenced. We affirm the trial court in all other respects.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Henry v. State, 498 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…of the entire record indicates that appellant pled guilty to and was sentenced for a third degree felony. Upon remand, the judgment should be corrected to show appellant was adjudicated guilty of the third degree felony of burglary. Perez v. State, 498 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). We affirm the judgment and sentence in all other respects. Reversed and remanded. GRIMES, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL, J., concur.…
-
Wright v. State, 568 So. 2d 1313 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…udicated the appellant guilty of the lesser included offense of possession of cocaine and stated that no fine would be imposed. Since a trial court’s written order of judgment and sentence must not vary from its oral pronouncement, Perez v. State, 498 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), the case must be remanded to correct these errors. Accordingly, the cause is remanded to the trial court to allow correction of the clerical errors. SCHOONOVER, C.J., and SCHEB and DANAHY, JJ., concur.…
-
Thomas v. State, 531 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…rt for correction of two minor errors. First, the written judgment and sentence forms must be corrected to reflect the court’s oral pronouncement to the effect appellant’s two separate fourteen-year sentences are to run concurrently. Perez v. State, 498 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Second, because the court imposed costs without notice or the opportunity to be heard, those provisions must be stricken without prejudice to the state to seek reassessment after proper notice. Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (F…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In the Interest of R.B. v. State, 429 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Yates v. State, 429 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Caston v. State, 58 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1952)