CHRISTIAN E. MOSCO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
W. SHARP, Judge.
We affirm Mosco’s convictions and sentences for three counts of burglary of a conveyance1 and one count (each) of aggravated battery,2 possession of burglary tools,3 and grand theft.4 However, we note a scrivener’s error in the final judgment which states that Count II, aggravated battery, is a first degree felony, when it is (in fact) a second degree felony. We remand for the sole purpose of correcting the scrivener’s error. Mosco need not be present.
AFFIRM; REMAND to correct scrivener’s error. PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . § 810.02(3), Fla.Stat. (1993).
. § 784.045(1)(a), Fla.Stat. (1993).
. § 810.06, Fla.Stat. (1993).
. § 812.014(1) and (2)(c)1, Fla.Stat. (1993).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stombaugh v. State, 704 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…nolo contendere to count II, and indicates he was sentenced to five years probation concurrent with count I. However, the state nol prosed count II as [*726] part of the plea bargain. Thus we remand to correct the scrivener’s error. Mosco v. State, 640 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). Another scrivener-type error which must be corrected is the failure of the trial court to enter a written sentence in case number 93-3062, after orally pronouncing a sentence of time served. The court should also enter a written…
-
Cioni v. State, 809 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…ot now be considered on appeal. Hill v. State, 734 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). As to the second issue, the state concedes there is a scrivener’s error. We remand for the purpose of correcting the error. Cioni need not be present. Mosco v. State, 640 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). AFFIRM sentence; REMAND to correct scrivener’s error. COBB and ORFINGER, R.B., JJ„ concur. . § 810.02(3), Fla. Stat. (1991). . § 812.014(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (1999). .§ 843.02, Fla. Stat. (1991).…
-
Knight v. State, 954 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…1257 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). We remand this cause solely for the purpose of enabling the trial court to enter written orders of revocation, nunc pro tunc, in accordance with its oral pronouncement. Knight does not need to be present. Mosco v. State, 640 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). REMANDED for Correction of Scriveners’ Errors. ORFINGER, MONACO and EYANDER, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence