DONALD E. MINIE, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2003-06-06
No. 2D01-4265
STRINGER and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
846 So. 2d 1232 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2003) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Topics
Anders V. California Anders V. California Procedure Scrivener'S Error Probation Revocation

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Anders V. California cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
CANADY, Judge.

CANADY, Judge.

On this appeal briefed and reviewed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), the appellant, Donald E. Minie, Jr., challenges the sentences imposed upon the revocation of the probation he was serving for attempted handling and fondling of a child under sixteen and cocaine possession — offenses he committed in 1997. Minie also challenges his judgment and sentence for robbery — an offense he committed in 2001 and which served, in part, as the basis for the revocation of his probation.

We conclude there are no meritorious substantive grounds to support this appeal. We, however, remand this cause for correction of a scrivener’s error on Minie’s written robbery judgment. The judgment erroneously indicates Minie’s robbery offense as a first-degree felony. The record shows that Minie pleaded no contest to the robbery offense — and was otherwise adjudicated and sentenced therefor — as a second-degree felony. The trial court is therefore directed to correct the written judgment to reflect Minie’s robbery conviction as a second-degree felony. This cause is affirmed in all other respects.

Affirmed but remanded for correction of scrivener’s error. STRINGER and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Queior v. State, 157 So. 3d 370 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)
    …tate of Florida played any role in either the training or the issuance of the certificates. . We note that the Fifth District came to a different conclusion on the issue we decide here in a subsequent appeal brought by Mr. Terry. In Terry v. State, 846 So. 2d 1232, 1232-33 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003), a different panel of the Fifth District held that a probation officer's testimony concerning the performance and results of the field test of the sort approved in the earlier appearance of Mr. Terry before the court wou…
  • Dawson v. State, 177 So. 3d 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
    …about the nature of the test, how it is performed, and the number of times a test is administered; furthermore, the results will support a finding of probation violation as long as the testing is not the sole basis for the finding.” Terry v. State, 846 So. 2d 1232, 1233 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (emphasis added). That distinction was not made in the first Terry opinion. Finally, we grant the State’s request for a certified question of great public importance. Although the supreme court has accepted jurisdiction in…
  • Johns v. State, 935 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
    …PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Terry v. State, 846 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). PLEUS, C.J., ORFINGER and MONACO, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw