RANDALL HUDSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2000-12-12
No. 1D99-4099
BOOTH, LAWRENCE and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR.
772 So. 2d 614 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2000) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s judgment and sentences, except for that portion of the written sentence that does not conform with the trial court’s oral pronouncement. The court orally pronounced a sentence of five years on the grand theft count and imposed a sentence of eleven years, nine months in the written sentence.

We remand this case with instructions for the written sentence to be conformed to the court’s oral pronouncement. See Frost v. State, 769 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)(‘Where there is a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and the written sentence, we should remand for the trial court to conform the written sentence to the oral pronouncement.”). As noted in Frost, appellant need not be present for the correction of the sentence upon remand. The judgment of conviction and sentences are otherwise affirmed.

BOOTH, LAWRENCE and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Evans v. State, 895 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
    …d an eighteen month prison term to be followed by eight months of probation. The order of probation states that appellant is to be on probation for eighteen months. While such discrepancies clearly constitute a sentencing error, see Hudson v. State, 772 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), appellant did not preserve the issue below with either a contemporaneous objection or Rule 3.800(b) motion.2 Therefore, we may not address this sentencing error on direct appeal. See Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89, 98 (Fla.2000…
  • Romero v. State, 832 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
    …for the violation of the probationary portions of the probationary split sentences. Therefore, we remand with instructions to the trial court to conform the appellant’s written judgment and sentence with its oral pronouncement. See Hudson v. State, 772 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). The appellant’s judgment and sentence are otherwise affirmed. AFFIRMED; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. . ERVIN, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw