DAVID CARL BRIDE
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
In this Anders appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's revocation of David Carl Bride's probation following his admission to probation violations. The court remanded the case for the trial court to enter an amended order specifying which conditions of probation were violated.
The probation revocation was affirmed as proper. However, the court remanded for the trial court to enter an amended order that lists the specific conditions of probation that the trial court found were violated.
“the revocation of Appellant's probation following his admission to the violations and the resulting judgment and sentences imposed”
Describes what was affirmed on appeal—the probation revocation and resulting sentences.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Bride admitted to violations of his probation conditions. The trial court revoked his probation and imposed sentences. The specific facts un…
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA
Case Nos. 5D2023-2476 5D2023-2477 5D2023-2478
LT Case Nos. 2018-CF-2774 2017-CF-003569 2018-CF-002327-A
DAVID CARL BRIDE,
Appellant,
V.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County. Robert W. Hodges, Judge.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and George D.E. Burden, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pamela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
June 14, 2024
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders¹ appeal, we affirm without further discussion, the revocation of Appellant's probation following his admission to the violations and the resulting judgment and sentences imposed. We remand for the trial court to enter an amended order of revocation of probation in each of Appellant's cases listing the conditions of probation that the trial court found that Appellant had violated. See Murphy v. State, 612 So. 2d 676, 677 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (remanding for entry of a written order of revocation stating the conditions of probation that were violated).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.
EDWARDS, C.J., and MAKAR and HARRIS, JJ., concur. Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Murphy v. State, 612 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)