PHILLIP JOHN WILSON, 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 appellate court affirmed the conviction and sentence but reversed the written fine amount, remanding for correction.
The trial court orally pronounced a $100 fine, but the written order imposed a $1000 fine and increased the total costs. The defendant appealed this d…
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 Preservation Of Error cases and more on FLexlaw
LaROSE, Judge.
Phillip John Wilson appeals his conviction and sentence for possession of Al-prazolam. We affirm the judgment and sentence, with one exception. We strike the $1000 fine imposed under section 775.083(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2003), and remand for correction of the written order assessing fines and costs.
The trial court orally pronounced a fine of $100 under section 775.083(l)(c). The trial court also pronounced other fines and costs not at issue on appeal and stated: “The total [is] $951.” The written order reflects a fine of $1000 and a total of $1951 in fines and costs.
The written order must comport with the trial court’s oral pronouncement. See Mills v. State, 765 So. 2d 153, 154 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). The error was properly preserved by a motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), which was denied. Accordingly, we remand this cause to the trial court with directions to conform the written order assessing fines and costs to the oral pronouncement.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
SALCINES and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Molina v. State, 946 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…petence to proceed, and the entry of an order finding competence.” Samson, 853 So. 2d at 1117; Jackson. It is appropriate for the trial court to consider reports to determine the defendant’s competence, but only if the parties agree. Blow v. State, 902 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Johnson v. State, 855 So. 2d 218 (Fla. ,5th DCA 2003).2 Here, Molina never agreed to have the trial court consider any reports. Until the presumption of continued incompetence dissipates, the criminal defendant may not be tried…
-
Rumph v. State, 217 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…arly when the defendant was previously adjudicated incompetent, as the trial court must make an independent determination on the issue. Id. at 678 (citing Fowler v. State, 255 So. 2d 513, 515 (Fla. 1971)); Presley, 199 So. 3d at 1018; Blow v. State, 902 So. 2d 340, 342 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (citing Sledge, 871 So. 2d at 1021). The stipulation to determining the issue based on the expert’s written reports may be inferred from the context. See Presley, 199 So. 3d at 1018-19 (citing Merriell v. State, 169 So. 3d 1…
-
Bennie John Ross v. State, 155 So. 3d 1259 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…ppellant was presumed incompetent to proceed at any material stage, rendering his plea invalid as a matter of law and subject to challenge for the first time on direct appeal. Blackmon v. State, 23 So. 3d 239, 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Blow v. State, 902 So. 2d 340, 342 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Samson v. State, 853 So. 2d 1116, 1117 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Because appellant had been adjudicated incompetent prior to the entry of the plea, the competency issue was cognizable on direct appeal without a motion to withdra…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Katharthur Mills v. State, 765 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)