DONNELL SURRATT, 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.
Court affirmed convictions and sentences but remanded to correct clerical errors in the Orders of Adjudication of Guilt that inconsistently stated the sentencing terms compared to oral pronouncements and written sentences.
Orders of Adjudication of Guilt must be corrected to reflect the sentences actually imposed at sentencing.
[1] Orders of Adjudication of Guilt that reflect different sentencing terms than those orally pronounced and written by the trial court must be corrected on remand.
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 Surratt was convicted and sentenced in two cases: Case No. 91-3743 to nine years incarceration followed by six years probation (first 36 mon…
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 Felony Degree Classification cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
We affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences but note that the Orders of Adjudication of Guilt are inconsistent with both the oral pronouncement and the written sentences and must be corrected. In Case No. 91-3743, appellant was sentenced to nine years incarceration followed by six years probation, the first thirty-six months of which shall be Drug Offender Probation, but the Order of Adjudication of Guilt reflects a sentence of nine years incarceration plus thirty-six months Drug Offender Probation followed by six years regular probation, for a total penalty of eighteen years for a second degree felony. Similarly, the oral and written sentence in Case No. 86-4773 indicate a sentence of nine years incarceration followed by fifteen years probation with the first thirty-six months to be Drug Offender Probation, but the Order of Adjudication of Guilt reflects nine years incarceration followed by thirty-six months Drug Offender Probation plus fifteen years regular probation. The judgment in Case No. 86-4773 also incorrectly lists the degree of crime as a second degree felony rather than a first degree felony and should be corrected.
AFFIRMED BUT REMANDED FOR CORRECTION OF CLERICAL ERRORS.
PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ„ concur.