JOHN BRISTER, 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 a scrivener's error in a probation order, which misstated the sentence length, should be corrected to conform to the orally pronounced sentence.
Appellant sought to correct a scrivener's error in a probation order that stated a sentence of 4 1/2 years instead of the 4 years orally pronounced by…
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 Probation Order cases and more on FLexlaw
DANIEL, Chief Judge.
Appellant seeks correction of a scrivener’s error existing in the probation order entered after the oral pronouncement of the sentence by the trial court. Following a plea of nolo contendere to two counts of grand theft, the appellant was sentenced to 2 years incarceration followed by 2 years probation on one count and 2 years probation on the other count.
The probation order prepared following the oral pronouncement of the sentence indicated that appellant was to be committed to the Department of Corrections for a term of 4V2 years instead of the 4 years pronounced by the court.1 The state concedes this scrivener’s error. Accordingly, the probation order in Circuit Court Case No. 89-3441 is modified to show that the total of the probationary split sentence is 4 years rather than 4¾⅛ years. Cf. Nobile v. State, 542 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Wynn v. State, 394 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).
As corrected, the judgment and sentence and probation orders are affirmed.
DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur. . The probation order erroneously suggests that the appellant received a "true split sentence" rather than a “probationary split sentence.” See Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1988).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rosado v. State, 614 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…2 S.Ct. 1773, 118 L.Ed.2d 432 (1992); State v. Law, 559 So. 2d 187 (Fla.1989). The appellant also contends, and the state agrees, that the restitution order of the court should be corrected to reflect the amount of $4,203.00. See Brister v. State, 562 So. 2d 452 (Fla.5th DCA 1990). Accordingly, the restitution order is modified to reflect that figure. AS CORRECTED, THE JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE ARE AFFIRMED. GOSHORN, C.J., and W. SHARP, J., concur.…
-
Brown v. State, 589 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…with sentences for sale and delivery of cocaine. Because trespass in an occupied structure is a first degree misdemeanor punishable by no more than 1 year imprisonment,2 we modify this sentence to conform to the statutory maximum. Brister v. State, 562 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Warren v. State, 561 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 5th [*456] DCA 1990); Freeman v. State, 576 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Judgments AFFIRMED; Sentences AFFIRMED as modified. HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur. . § 810.08(2)(b), Fla.Stat.…
Authorities Cited
- Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1988)
- State v. Damico, 542 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
- Wynn v. State, 394 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Wallace v. State, 394 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)