DANIEL RAY BELL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2001-10-24
No. 4D00-4338
DELL, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
798 So. 2d 796 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2001)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court affirmed the appellant's plea and probation, finding no arguable issue for appeal.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant pleaded no contest to some charges and was placed on probation. The public defender's office sought to withdraw, arguing no arguable appella…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Daniel Ray Bell pleaded no contest to three of the nine counts charged and was placed on probation. The public defender’s office filed a brief and motion to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We agree that there is no arguable issue for appeal, and affirm. However, our independent review of the record revealed two matters that must be addressed on remand.

The state announced a nolle prosequi on two of the six counts that remained pend ing after appellant’s plea, but the record shows no disposition for Counts I through TV. On remand, the trial court shall conduct such further proceedings and enter such further orders as are necessary to dispose of those counts.

The probation order misidentifies the offenses for which appellant was placed on probation as three counts of burglary of a conveyance. His plea was to two counts of burglary of a conveyance and one count dealing in stolen property. Since the record shows no actual confusion about the nature of the charges, we conclude that this was a mere scrivener’s error that requires correction, not reversal.

DELL, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw