S.S.M., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
S.S.M., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
875 So. 2d 763
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2004)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
As the State properly concedes, a written probation order must conform with the trial court’s oral pronouncements at sentencing. We thus reverse and remand for the limited purpose of correcting the written order of probation to reflect the trial court’s oral pronouncements, which in this case means that the probation order should reflect that the curfew of 8:00 p.m. does not apply if the juvenile is working past that hour. Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
S.D.F. v. State, 911 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…ls from these written orders. Based on the State’s proper confession of error, we reverse and remand to the trial court to correct its written adjudicate- [*888] ry and probation orders to conform with its oral pronouncements. See S.S.M. v. State, 875 So. 2d 763, 763 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)(holding that “a written probation order must conform with the trial court’s oral pronouncements at sentencing”); Creme v. State, 752 So. 2d 1238, 1239 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)(reversing and remanding to trial court to correct sente…
-
N.G. v. State, 50 So. 3d 801 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…confirms that the trial court ordered that the adjudication be withheld at the adjudicatory hearing, we reverse and remand to the lower court for correction of the written adjudicatory order to conform to the oral pronouncement. See S.S.M. v. State, 875 So. 2d 763, 763 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (finding that a “written probation order must conform with the trial court’s oral pronouncements at sentencing”); see also S.D.F. v. State, 911 So. 2d 887, 887-88 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (reversing and remanding to trial court to…
-
Samira Nekhaila v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Families, 971 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…nder Florida law the Department must recover overpay-ments, regardless of whether overpayment is the result of an error on the part of the Department or the recipient. See § 414.41, Fla. Stat. (2005); Payne v. Fla. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 875 So. 2d 763 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Willis v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 735 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). While we sympathize with the appellant’s situation, [*928] the statute requires repayment even though a significant portion of the error was attribut…