BARBARA ESTELL LABAR, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Oral Pronouncement Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
LEHAN, Judge.
We affirm defendant’s convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer and obstructing or opposing an officer without violence.
Defendant’s contention concerning the sufficiency of the evidence was not preserved for appeal. See Gomez v. State, 309 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). Defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in announcing defendant’s guilt before defense counsel made a closing argument and announced that the defense had rested was waived. See M.S. v. State, 584 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). '
However, we strike the special conditions of probation because they did not conform to the oral pronouncement at the sentencing hearing. See Seawright v. State, 572 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Williams v. State, 542 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).
Affirmed except remanded for conformance of the sentence to the oral pronouncement.
RYDER, A.C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…s 4 and 10, and that portion of condition 6 that prohibits the use of alcohol to excess, because they are not statutorily mandated and were not orally pronounced at sentencing. See Tomlinson v. State, 645 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Labar v. State, 584 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Although Mr. Reyes contends that the trial court erred in requiring him to obtain a high school diploma as a special condition of probation, our review of the sentencing transcript and the written order of probation reveals that…
-
Eliazar Juan Ochoa v. State, 596 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…sequently, we remand for the trial judge to strike that portion of the probation order requiring restitution. Because it was not orally pronounced, we remand for the trial judge to strike special condition (6) of the probation order. Labar v. State, 584 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). We otherwise affirm. Affirmed but remanded with directions. SCHOONOVER, C.J., and DANAHY and FRANK, JJ., concur.…
-
Arnold v. State, 596 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…r visit places where intoxicants, drugs, or other dangerous substances are unlawfully sold, dispensed, or used, and participate in self-improvement programs. These conditions were not orally pronounced and must therefore be stricken. Labar v. State, 584 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). [*487] Appellant’s second point concerns the validity of various costs assessed against him. Appellant agreed to pay $250 to the Court Improvement Fund, but the amount actually assessed was $265. We strike the amount by which the…
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
- Williams v. State, 542 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- Oden v. State, 542 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- Gomez v. State, 309 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
- Seawright v. State, 572 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- M.S. v. State, 584 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)