JAMES GREGORY ANTHONY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the judgment of conviction but remand the case to correct the discrepancy between the oral and written pronouncements of sentence. At the sentencing hearing, the trial judge stated that he was sentencing appellant to fifteen years “concurrent to the sentence he’s already serving.” The last page of the written sentence indicates that the sentence as to count IV is to be served consecutively to the sentences previously imposed. The court’s oral pronouncements at the sentencing hearing prevail over the written sentencing form. See Gibbs v. State, 693 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Thomas v. State, 595 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
GUNTHER and GROSS, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moreland v. State, 853 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…remanded to the trial court to determine the correct number of days to be credited before the correction is made. This court has consistently held that an oral pronouncement at sentencing prevails over a written order. See, e.g., Anthony v. State, 705 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Gibbs v. State, 693 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Thomas v. State, 595 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Where there is no ambiguity in the trial court’s oral pronouncement, the sentencing order must be corrected to reflect the o…
-
Hubbard Constr. Co. v. Jacobs Civil, Inc., 969 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…issue, estoppel is a matter for resolution by the arbitrator. Accordingly, this court should affirm the trial court’s order compelling arbitration so the [*1077] arbitrator may decide the issue in the arbitration proceedings. . See Cooper v. Fine, 705 So. 2d 131, 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) ("Although appellant claims she is entitled to litigate the question of whether conditions precedent to arbitration were fulfilled, that issue is a question for the arbitrator.”); City of Mount Dora v. Cent. Fla. Police Bene…
-
COX v. Vill. OF Tequesta, 185 So. 3d 601 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…nding that timeliness is “a .question for an arbitrator.” Id. at 46. See also Gren, 133 So. 3d at 1068 (stating that “factual issues ... including the timeliness in initiating the arbitration proceeding, belonged to the arbitrator”); Cooper v. Fine, 705 So. 2d 131, 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (finding that “whether conditions precedent to arbitration were fulfilled ... is a question for the arbitrator”); O’Keefe Architects, Inc., 944 So. 2d at 188 (holding that a statute of limitations defense was to be decided b…
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
- Thomas v. State, 595 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Gibbs v. State, 693 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)