RICHARD ARLEN LEPPERT A/K/A RICHARD A. LEPPERT, JR., A/K/A RICHARD A. LEPPERT, II, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
The court affirmed the revocation of Leppert's community control but remanded three cases for correction of scrivener's errors in the written sentences that did not match the oral pronouncements.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Leppert's community control, and the oral sentences were legal, but written sentences in three cases contained scrivener's errors requiring remand for correction.
[1] Written sentences that do not comport with oral pronouncements contain scrivener's errors remediable by remand for correction.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeppert had his community control revoked in four trial court cases. The public defender and Leppert challenged both the revocation and the sentences …
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Revocation Of Community Control cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
Richard Arlen Leppert a/k/a Richard A. Leppert, Jr., a/k/a Richard A. Leppert, II, has appealed the revocation of his community control in trial court case numbers 98-3929-CF, 98-4052-CF, 99-16-CF, and 99-17-CF. The public defender filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning whether the trial court erred in revoking Leppert’s community control and in imposing the sentences thereon. In a pro se supplemental brief Leppert also challenges his sentences.
We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it revoked Leppert’s community control. See Brown v. State, 813 So. 2d 202, 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). The sentences orally announced by the trial court are legal; however, the written sentences in cases 98-3929-CF, 98-4052-CF, and 99-16-CF do not comport with the oral pronouncements and must be remanded for correction of scrivener’s errors. See Allison v. State, 825 So. 2d 504, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Accordingly, we affirm the convictions, affirm the sentence imposed in case 99-17-CF; and remand the sentences in cases 98-3929-CF, 98-4052-CF, and 99-16-CF for correction of scrivener’s errors.
Affirmed and remanded.
ALTENBERND, C.J., and KELLY, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Brown v. State, 813 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Allison v. State, 825 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)