KENNY DEJOHN CULLIVER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1997-05-27
No. 96-1244
MINER, ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
693 So. 2d 1152 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1997) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the appellant’s convictions, but, because the trial judge did not enter a written order of his decision to impose adult sanctions on the juvenile appellant, we vacate the appellant’s sentences and remand this case for the trial court to issue a nunc pro tunc written order. No new sentencing hearing is required, and the appellant need not be present for the ministerial function of entering a written order that conforms to the judge’s oral pronouncement. See Bridgewa-ter v. State, 668 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).

MINER, ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Taramona v. State, 707 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
    …la. 3d DCA 1997); Bryant v. State, 686 So. 2d 784, 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Maddox v. State, 619 So. 2d 473, 473 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). As this will be purely a ministerial act, we deem the appellant’s presence to be unnecessary. See Culliver v. State, 693 So. 2d 1152, 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Boggs v. State, 557 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Dunlap v. State, 405 So. 2d 796, 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). Affirmed and remanded with instructions.…
  • Bingham v. State, 719 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
    …91 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Bryant v. State, 686 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Maddox v. State, 619 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Because this will be purely a ministerial act, appellant’s presence will be unnecessary. See Culliver v. State, 693 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Boggs v. State, 557 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Dunlap v. State, 405 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981).…
  • Kirby v. State, 702 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
    …e as an adult, requires reversal of his sentence. While the state concedes, and we agree, that a written order is required under Brown v. State, 692 [*600] So. 2d 987 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), no new sentencing hearing is required. See Culliver v. State, 693 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Accordingly, we vacate appellant’s sentence and remand for the trial court to issue a nunc pro tunc written order. We observe that appellant need not be present for the ministerial function of entering a written order that con…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw