JAMES AVERY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
ORFINGER, Judge.
Appellant’s convictions are affirmed. The State concedes, however, that the two five year terms of probation imposed at sentencing on two of the four counts were intended by the trial court to be served concurrently, as orally pronounced at the sentencing hearing, rather than consecutively as reflected 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 REMANDED for correction.
COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Robinson v. State, 689 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…ntenced appellant to ten years in prison, while the written sentence recites that the sentence is for fifteen years. We therefore remand to the trial court to correct the written sentence and conform it to the oral pronouncement. See Avery v. State, 543 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 5th DCA), dismissed, 553 So. 2d 1164 (Fla.1989). Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded. GLICKSTEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur. . We specifically do not decide whether the drug farm is the functional equivalent of jail so as to req…
-
Ellis v. State, 816 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…s not reference any statutory authority. Where a written order does not conform to the court’s oral pronouncement of judgment and sentence, the oral pronouncement prevails. Tory v. State, 686 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see also Avery v. State, 543 So. 2d 296, 297 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). However, if the state does not concede the error was clerical, a conflict between the written order and the oral pronouncement requires a factual resolution by the trial court. Tory, 686 So. 2d at 691. The State does not c…
-
Tetro v. State, 581 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. However, we remand so the judgment can be corrected. The state concedes that the written sentences do not conform to the trial judge’s oral pronouncements at sentencing. Avery v. State, 543 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 5th DCA), appeal dismissed, 553 So. 2d 1164 (1989) (when written orders are inconsistent with oral pronouncements made at sentencing, the oral pronouncements prevail). The written judgment should be corrected to reflect that as to counts II, I…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Venuti v. State, 437 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Suggs v. Cowart, 437 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)