OWEN TEMPLE FLOWERS, 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 appellate court affirmed a probation order for battery on a law enforcement officer but remanded the case to remove a probation condition that was not orally pronounced at sentencing. This case highlights the requirement for written probation orders to accurately reflect oral pronouncements.
No, a written probation order must conform to the oral pronouncement made at the sentencing hearing. Conditions not orally pronounced cannot be included in the written order.
[1] A written order of probation containing special conditions not orally pronounced at the sentencing hearing must be corrected to conform with the oral pronouncement.
[2] An appellate court must affirm a judgment when an independent review of the record reveals no reversible error, even if counsel asserts the inability to make a good faith…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Inclusion in a written order of special conditions of probation that were not orally pronounced at the sentencing hearing mandates a remand with instructions that the written order be corrected to conform with the oral pronouncement.”
Establishes the legal principle that written orders must match oral pronouncements.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOwen Temple Flowers was found guilty of battery on a law enforcement officer and sentenced to probation. The written probation order included a condit…
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 Battery On A Law Enforcement Officer cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
A jury found the appellant, Owen Temple Flowers, guilty of battery upon a law enforcement officer. He was subsequently placed on probation for that offense and this appeal challenges the court’s probation order. Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396,18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), in which she states that but for a minor sentencing error cognizable in an Anders appeal, she is unable to make a good faith argument that reversible error occurred in the trial court. Our independent review of the record persuades us that counsel is correct. We therefore affirm the probation order in all respects but remand for deletion of one condition of probation erroneously imposed.
At sentencing, the trial judge announced his decision to withhold adjudication of the appellant’s guilt and sentence the appellant to 12 months of probation. On the same day, the judge signed an order embodying the sentence orally pronounced, but including this condition of probation not mentioned at the sentencing hearing: “The court retains jurisdiction to place you in the Probation and Restitution Center upon recommendation of your Probation/Community Control Officer without the finding of Violation of Probation/Community Control.” Inclusion in a written order of special conditions of probation that were not orally pronounced at the sentencing hearing mandates a remand with instructions that the written order be corrected to conform with the oral pronouncement. See Sumter v. State, 570 So. 2d 1039, 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), rev. dismissed, 583 So. 2d 1037 (Fla.1991); Rowland v. State, 548 So. 2d 812, 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Bryant v. State, 577 So. 2d 1372, 1375-76 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); and Ashe v. State, 582 So. 2d 759, 760 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). We therefore reverse the appealed order of probation and remand for deletion of the above-referenced condition. In all other respects, the order is affirmed.
SMITH, ZEHMER and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shaddix v. State, 599 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…a. 1st DCA 1991), we reversed and remanded the provision for the trial court to conform the written order to the conditions as pronounced at sentencing. We do likewise here. See Johnson v. State, 598 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Flowers v. State, 595 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); McCollun v. State, 586 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Sumter v. State, 570 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Several other requirements pertaining to alcohol or substance abuse screening, counseling and treatment (Conditions 13…
-
Johnson v. State, 598 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…tion for this charge, appellant was not on constructive or actual notice of this condition. Therefore, the community control and probation order provisions requiring payment of $1.00 per month to First Step, Inc., are reversed. See Flowers v. State, 595 So. 2d 263, 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Sumter v. State, 570 So. 2d 1039, 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review dismissed, 583 So. 2d 1037 (Fla.1991); Rowland v. State, 548 So. 2d 812, 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). In all other respects, the community control and probation…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Rowland v. State, 548 So. 2d 812 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Ashe v. State, 582 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Bryant v. State, 577 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Sumter v. State, 570 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)