TYRONZA A. WOODARD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Jones v. State, 876 So. 2d 642, 644-45 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (stating that a revocation of probation proceeding is merely an extension of the sentencing process and is, thus, subject to its preservation requirements and that sentencing errors are not reviewable on direct appeal unless they are preserved in the trial court by a contemporaneous objection at sentencing or by a motion timely filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)); see also Brannon v. State, 850 So. 2d 452, 456 (Fla.2003) (holding that even a fundamental sentencing error cannot be raised on direct appeal if it is not first preserved in the trial court by an objection or a motion to correct sentence).
BROWNING, C.J., DAVIS, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davis v. State, 969 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…served by contemporaneous objection or by motion filed pursuant to rule 3.800(b), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Simmons v. State, 965 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Griffin v. State, 958 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Woodard v. State, 946 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Brown v. State, 935 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Telfair v. State, 903 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Evans v. State, 895 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Cf. Aponte v. State, 896 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (holding that…
Authorities Cited
- Brannon v. State, 850 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 2003)
- Loring Spencer Jones v. State, 876 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)