CLINTON LEROY BINGHAM, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1998-11-04
No. 98-728
Before NESBITT, GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ.
719 So. 2d 1032 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1998) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM

PER CURIAM

We affirm the order revoking the appellant’s probation but remand for the trial court to reduce to writing its reasons and the evidence relied upon for the revocation in accordance with the court’s oral pronouncement. See Taramona v. State, 707 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Salvatierra v. State, 691 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).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Mosley v. State, 735 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
    …PER CURIAM. We affirm the revocation of probation, but remand to the trial court for the entry of a written order. See Babb v. State, 720 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Bingham v. State, 719 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). The probation officer’s testimony [*548] was sufficient for the trial court to conclude that appellant had changed his residence without his probation officer’s permission. See McPherson v. State, 530 So. 2d 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 19…

Authorities Cited (12 total)

View all 12 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw