LEE VAN WALTON JR.
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.
The trial court's convictions and sentences are affirmed, but the written judgment must be amended to correctly reflect that the sentences run consecutively rather than concurrently.
[1] A scrivener's error in a written judgment that does not reflect the sentences as orally imposed by the trial court may be corrected on remand without disturbing the under…
Previewing 1 of 1 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 was convicted by jury of Refusal to Submit to DUI Testing and Driving Under the Influence. The trial court imposed an eight-month jail sente…
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 Jury Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No. 5D2024-1652 LT Case No. 2023-CT-001958
LEE VAN WALTON, JR., Appellant,
v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
On appeal from the County Court for Clay County. Kristina Keller Mobley, Judge.
Charlie Cofer, Public Defender, and Elizabeth Hogan Webb, Assistant Public Defender, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Kristie Regan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
April 10, 2026
HARRIS, J.
In this Anders¹ appeal, Lee Van Walton, Jr. (“Appellant") challenges the judgment and sentences imposed after a jury trial
1 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
on the charges of Refusal to Submit to DUI Testing and DUI. Appellant has shown no reversible error in the judgment and sentence, and our review of the record likewise has shown no reversible error apparent on its face. See State v. Causey, 503 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1987). However, there is an obvious scrivener's error that should be corrected. The trial court ordered that Appellant's eight-month jail sentence for Refusal to Submit to DUI Testing and his twelve-month probationary sentence for Driving Under the Influence were to run consecutively. The written judgment and sentence erroneously reflects the sentences running concurrently. Therefore, while we affirm the judgment and sentence entered below, we remand with instructions that an amended judgment and sentence be rendered which correctly reflects that Appellant's sentences were imposed consecutively.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions.
LAMBERT and EDWARDS, JJ., concur. Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
2