JOHN WESLEY THADEN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Therrien v. State, 859 So. 2d 585, 587 (Fla. 1st DCA) (rejecting appellant’s argument that section 775.21, Florida Statutes (2000), violated his right to procedural due process, because it did not require a hearing to determine whether he posed a danger to the public), review ‘pending, No. SC03-2219 (Fla. Dec. 18, 2003). Accord Glenn v. State, 861 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Reyes v. State, 854 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Milks v. State, 848 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 859 So. 2d 514 (Fla.2003). We certify conflict with Espindola v. State, 855 So. 2d 1281, 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).
AFFIRMED.
WOLF, C.J., ERVIN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Guirlande Cajuste v. Herlitschek, 204 So. 3d 80 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…long time aide.” (emphasis added). To the extent this conflict existed between the court’s oral pronouncement and the court’s two written orders regarding the timing of the ward’s gifts, the court’s oral pronouncement controls. See Glick v. Glick, 874 So. 2d 1238, 1241. (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“A trial court’s oral pronouncement must control over a later written order.”). Based on the court’s oral pronouncement, [*84] no directive existed regarding the timing of the ward’s gifts. What remains, therefore, is no…
-
Cappola v. Cappola, 280 So. 3d 102 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)…although this language is included in the written order. This court has held that “[a] trial court’s oral pronouncement must control over a later written order,” and that the subsequent order must accurately reflect the record. See Glick v. Glick, 874 So. 2d 1238, 1241 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); see also Cajuste v. Herlitschek, 204 So. 3d 80, 83 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (determining that when a conflict exists between the court’s oral pronouncement and its written order, the oral pronouncement controls). Accordingly,…
-
Silver v. Goodrich, 348 So. 3d 1153 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024)…e written order must be reversed.” Johansson v. Johansson, 348 So. 3d 1153, 1155 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022); see also Soldatich v. Jones, 290 So. 3d 497, 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020); Cappola v. Cappola, 280 So. 3d 102, 104 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019); Glick v. Glick, 874 So. 2d 1238, 1241 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). As such, we reverse and remand solely for the trial court to amend the written order to conform to its prior oral pronouncement stating that the Mother shall have weekly overnight visitations with the child every Wednesda…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ferman Carlos Espindola v. State, 855 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- Milks v. State, 848 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Reyes v. State, 854 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Therrien v. State, 859 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- Glenn v. State, 861 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Dantrell Deon Riley v. State, 861 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)