MICHAEL O. THOMPSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
MICHAEL O. THOMPSON, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
666 So. 2d 197
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1995)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Michael O. Thompson appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The substance of Thompson’s claim is that he is entitled to credit pursuant to State v. Green, 547 So. 2d 925 (Fla.1989). We agree and, therefore, reverse and remand this cause to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Reversed and remanded.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and BLUE and FULMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A.L. v. State, 790 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…ent do not conform due to the requirement in the written order that A.L. write a letter of apology to the victim. We agree. Since the letter of apology was not in the oral pronouncement, it must be stricken from the written judgment. Murph v. State, 666 So. 2d 197, 198 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); A.R. v. State, 504 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Accordingly, we affirm the adjudication of delinquency but remand with instructions for the trial court to enter a new disposition order that places A.L. on community control…
-
Fannin v. State, 751 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…ingle fifteen-year mandatory minimum with concurrent sentences for all other counts); see also Timonere v. State, 631 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (reversed and remanded for re-sentencing within guidelines), appeal after remand, Timonere v. State, 666 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (reversed repeated stacking of minimum mandatories, remanded for re-sentencing to single fifteen-year mandatory minimum with concurrent sentences for all other counts). On December 8, 1993, after this court handed down its opinio…1 / 2
-
B.R.W. v. State, 799 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…rt’s oral ruling. Based on the evidence and the trial court’s oral pronouncement, we agree that the disposition order must be corrected to reflect that B.R.W. was found guilty of a second-degree misdemeanor for criminal mischief. See Murph v. State, 666 So. 2d 197, 198 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); A.R. v. State, 504 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); § 806.13(1)(b)(1), Fla. Stat. (2000). Additionally, the single disposition order utilized in this case does not separately identify the maximum commitment period imposed on e…
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
- State v. Green, 547 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 1989)