JAMES A. CAMPBELL, 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 Campbell's probation revocation and sentence but remanded for correction of the written revocation order to reflect the trial court's oral pronouncement regarding Condition 3 rather than Condition 5.
A written probation revocation order must be corrected on remand to conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement accepting the defendant's plea.
[1] A written probation revocation order must be corrected on remand to conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement accepting the defendant's plea.
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 intelligence“A written revocation order must conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement.”
Court citing Robinson v. State for the principle that written orders must match oral pronouncements.
James Campbell was charged with violating two conditions of probation. Campbell admitted to violating Condition 3, the State agreed not to proceed on …
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 Written Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
James Campbell was charged with violating Conditions 3 and 5 of his probation. Campbell admitted that he violated Condition 3, and the State agreed not to proceed on Condition 5. The trial court accepted the plea agreement, revoked Campbell’s probation, and imposed the maximum available sentence recognized by the parties. The trial court then entered a written order revoking Campbell’s probation based on a violation of Condition 5.
Both Campbell and the State agree that the revocation and sentence should be affirmed. However, both parties also agree that the written order of revocation should be remanded so that it can be corrected to reflect the trial court’s oral pronouncement accepting Campbell’s plea as to Condition 3, not Condition 5. We agree that the revocation order must be remanded for such correction. See Rodriguez v. State, 777 So. 2d 1175, 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)(case remanded for the trial court to enter a written order of revocation in conformance with the court’s oral pronouncement); Robinson v. State, 763 So. 2d 1058, 1059 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)(“A written revocation order must conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement.”).
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED for entry of a corrected order of revocation.
GUNTHER, STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rodriguez v. State, 777 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Madison v. State, 777 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Robinson v. State, 763 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)