JUAN M. NARVAEZ, 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 court held that a written order of revocation must conform to the oral pronouncement, and a finding of violation for a condition not ordered is fundamental error.
[1] A written order of revocation must conform to the oral pronouncement made at the hearing.
[2] A revocation order may be reversed and remanded for clarification when the written order lists violations not addressed or found by the trial court at the revocation hear…
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 intelligenceJuan M. Narvaez challenged an order revoking his probation and community control. The written order listed eleven violations, but Narvaez admitted to …
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 Written Order Conformity To Oral Pronouncement cases and more on FLexlaw
WHATLEY, Judge.
The appellant, Juan M. Narvaez, challenges an order revoking his probation and community control.
We reverse and remand for clarification of the written revocation order. An amended affidavit of violation of probation and community control alleges that Nar-vaez violated eleven conditions of his probation and community control. At his hearing, Narvaez admitted to violating condition (A), condition (J), condition 9 and condition 12. At the end of the hearing, the trial court found that Narvaez violated condition (A), condition 9 and condition 12. Based on these three violations, the trial court revoked his probation and community control.
The trial court refused to hear testimony regarding other violations and stated that it was not violating him for those conditions.
However, the written order of revocation of probation and community control erroneously lists all eleven violations.
A written order of revocation must conform to the oral pronouncement at the hearing. Corona v. State, 642 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Hawthorne v. State, 583 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Here, the written order lists several violations that were not addressed at the revocation hearing.
Consequently, we reverse and remand with instructions to strike the reference to the conditions that the trial court failed to announce from the written revocation order. Further, Narvaez admitted, and the trial court found, that he violated condition (A). This finding was fundamental error because Narvaez was never ordered to comply with this condition. See Hoshaw v. State, 533 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).
Therefore, the reference to condition (A) should also be stricken from the written revocation order.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand with instructions to strike the reference to all conditions except condition 9 and condition 12 from the written order of revocation. Narvaez need not be present for the entry of the amended revocation order. PARKER, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (23 total)
-
Salvatierra v. State, 691 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…PER CURIAM. A written order of probation revocation must conform to the court’s oral pronouncement at a defendant’s probation revocation hearing. Narvaez v. State, 674 So. 2d 868(Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Snell v. State, 658 So. 2d 1165(Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Defendant here complains that the inclusion of the offense of possession of cocaine in his written order of probation violation was not supported by the evidence produced at his p…
-
Laffitte v. State, 16 So. 3d 315 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…tion of probation (“the Order”). “A written order of probation revocation must conform to the court’s oral pronouncement at a defendant’s probation revocation hearing.” Salvatierra v. State, 691 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (citing Narvaez v. State, 674 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Snell v. State, 658 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)). Here, the Order specified that the defendant violated condition “L.7.” of the order of probation which required payment of supervision costs, and condition “L.8.e.,” which requ…
-
Williams v. State, 764 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…(2), (12) twice, and (13). In Case No. 97-1032, the written order of revocation specifies a violation of conditions (2), (9) twice, and (13). A written order of revocation must conform with the trial court’s oral pronouncement. See Narvaez v. State, 674 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). We, therefore, remand with directions that the revocation orders be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement. Finally, the offenses occurred on April 14, 1997, and between February 1 and March 11, 1997. Because appellant…
Previewing 3 of 23 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Corona v. State, 642 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Hoshaw v. State, 533 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Hawthorne v. State, 583 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)