TIMOTHY LOUIS EVANS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
TIMOTHY LOUIS EVANS, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
932 So. 2d 1291
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2006)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
SHAHOOD, J.
We affirm the convictions of appellant, Timothy Evans, on the charges of grand theft, two counts of giving false information to a pawnbroker, and two counts of dealing in stolen property following a trial by jury. Appellee, State of Florida, concedes, and we agree, appellant’s orders of probation must be corrected to conform with the oral pronouncement of the trial court. Where there is a discrepancy between an oral pronouncement and a written sentence, the case must be remanded for the trial court to conform the written sentence to the oral pronouncement. Upon remand, appellant need not be present for the correction of sentence. See Frost v. State, 769 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
Affirmed; Remanded.
FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
LEE v. State, 939 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…ourt’s order, dated August 9, 2006, we dismiss this appeal. The trial court found the appellant’s claims in his rule 3.850 motion facially insufficient and dismissed the motion without prejudice to refile a facially sufficient motion. Rowe v. State, 932 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Therefore, the trial court’s order is a non-appealable, nonfinal order. Williams v. State, 884 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). DISMISSED. ALLEN, WEBSTER, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Rudder v. State, 769 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)