TRACEY ROBERTS, 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.
Tracey Roberts appealed his community control violation judgment on grounds that the trial court entered a flawed judgment containing scrivener's errors and failed to specify in writing which conditions he violated. The appellate court agreed on both points and remanded for correction of the judgment and entry of a proper order specifying the violated conditions.
The court held that the amended judgment must be vacated and remanded because it contained uncorrected scrivener's errors and because the trial court failed to comply with the requirement to specify in writing which conditions of community control were violated. The trial court must enter a corrected judgment on remand.
[1] A trial court must specify in a written order or judgment which conditions of community control have been violated.
[2] A scrivener's error in a judgment and sentence, such as misstating the degree of a felony violation or referencing a non-existent count, must be corrected on remand.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the trial judge must specify, in the written order or judgment, which conditions of probation or community control have been violated”
Establishes the legal requirement violated by the trial court in this case
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRoberts was originally convicted of possession of a firearm by a delinquent and placed on community control. His community control was revoked after h…
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 Violation Of Community Control cases and more on FLexlaw
Tracey Roberts appeals his judgment and sentence for violation of community control, arguing that 1) he was found to have committed “the non-existent crime of violation of community control felony”; and 2) the trial judge failed to enter a written order of violation stating in writing the conditions that were violated. We note parenthetically that Roberts does not contend that he did not commit a willful and substantial violation of his community control.
Roberts was originally convicted of possession of a firearm by a delinquent in violation of section 790.23(l)(b), Florida Statutes (2009).1 He was placed on community control, which was subsequently revoked after he was found to be in violation. Judgment and sentence were rendered on April 15, 2011, regarding the violation. However, an amended judgment and sentence were subsequently entered on April 21, 2011, that included the original crime of possession of a firearm by a delinquent, but also indicated an adjudication of guilt for the third-degree felony of “Count 6 Violation of Community Control Felony.” There was no count six and the violation of community control was for a second-degree felony, not a third-degree felony. Clearly, some type of scrivener’s error occurred when the trial court rendered the amended judgment and sentence that must be corrected on remand. The State concedes this error and agrees that this case should be remanded to correct that error.
We agree with Roberts that the trial court failed to enter a written order stating the conditions he violated. This court has consistently held that the trial judge must specify, in the written order or judgment, which conditions of probation or community control have been violated. Bell v. State, 60 So.3d 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011); Mormon v. State, 976 So.2d 1188 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Brinson v. State, 866 So.2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Barta v. State, 678 So.2d 923 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). There is no written order in the instant case, and the judgment does not indicate which conditions were violated. The State agrees that the instant case should be remanded for the entry of a judgment specifying which conditions Roberts violated.
We, therefore, vacate the amended judgment under review and remand this case to the trial court to enter a proper judgment correcting the scrivener’s error and specifying which conditions Roberts violated.
AMENDED JUDGMENT VACATED; REMANDED with directions.
GRIFFIN and MONACO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lowe v. State, 225 So. 3d 953 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
-
Biser v. State, 157 So. 3d 539 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)
-
Hiram Antonio Maldonado v. State, 288 So. 3d 1272 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Elbert Brinson v. State, 866 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Barta v. State, 678 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Mormon v. State, 976 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
- Bell v. State, 60 So. 3d 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)