LEONARDO PEREZ-CARDOSA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 trial court's judgments and sentences because the sole issue on appeal, the failure to enter written orders, was resolved by the subsequent entry of those orders.
The defendant was found to have violated his community control. The trial court initially sentenced him to ten years but reduced it to seven years the…
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 Relinquishment Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
On January 14, 2009, after conducting a community control violation hearing, the trial court found that the defendant, Leonardo Perez-Cardosa, had willfully violated his community control in Case Numbers 05-12730, 07-14594, and 07-89894 by changing his residence without the consent of his community control officer and failing to attend a drug/alcohol evaluation as instructed by his community control officer. Although the defendant was initially sentenced to ten years incarceration on each case, the following day the trial court reduced each of these sentences to seven years.
The sole issue raised in this appeal is the trial court’s failure to enter written orders memorializing its oral findings at the hearing. On September 11, 2009, this Court relinquished jurisdiction to allow the *201trial court to enter written orders of violation of the defendant’s community control. See Greene v. State, 919 So.2d 684 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (relinquishing jurisdiction for the entry of an order revoking probation); Cato v. State, 845 So.2d 250, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (relinquishing jurisdiction for entry of an order revoking probation specifying the conditions violated).
On December 4, 2009, this Court granted the State’s motion to supplement the record with the written orders subsequently entered by the trial court. Because the sole issue raised on appeal was the failure to issue these orders and that issue has now been resolved, we affirm the judgments and sentences under review.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Greene v. State, 919 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Harris v. State, 845 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Ponce Cato v. State, 845 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)