STEPHEN J. KLARICH, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We grant rehearing, withdraw our original opinion and substitute the following in its place.
Appellant contends that certain special conditions of his probation order are illegal and thus should be set aside. However, appellant made no objection to these conditions at the trial level nor did he file a motion to amend the probation order. Thus, his contentions have not been preserved for appeal. See § 924.051(3), Fla. Stat. (1997); Fla. R.App. P. 9.140(d); Maddox v. State, 708 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), rev. granted, 718 So. 2d 169 (Fla.1998); Mason v. State, 698 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). The errors complained of here do not appear to be fundamental in nature.
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN, C.J., W. SHARP, J., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2000)…d DCA 1998), review granted, 735 So. 2d 1285 (Fla.1999) (Case No. 95,325) Departure Sentence Kenon v. State, 724 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), review granted, 744 So. 2d 454 (Fla.1999) (Case No. 94,991) Scoresheet Error [*112] Klarich v. State, 730 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 5th DCA), review granted, 740 So. 2d 528 (Fla.1999) (Case No. 95,705) Costs Error and Deviation from Oral Pronouncement of Conditions of Probation Latiif v. State, 711 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 5th DCA), review granted, 725 So. 2d 1108 (Fla.1998) (Ca…
-
Barfield v. State, 762 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…and he made no motion to amend the probation order addressed to the trial court. Since they do not constitute fundamental error, they were not preserved for appellate review purposes. See Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000); Klarich v. State, 730 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) ' However, we do agree with Barfield that his requested jury . instruction 3.04,con-cerning the Independent Act defense should have been given. That instruction provides: 3.04 INDEPENDENT ACT If you find that the crime alleged…
-
Klarich v. State, 760 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 2000)…PER CURIAM. We have for review Klarich v. State, 730 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), a decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal that cited as controlling authority Maddox v. State, 708 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), approved in part, disapproved in part, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000). We have jurisdiction. See…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Maddox v. State, 708 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- Mason v. State, 698 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)