JAMES RANDY DEMICK, 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.
In this Anders appeal, the Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed James Randy Demick's probation revocation but remanded for correction of scrivener's errors in the revocation order. The trial court's written order incorrectly stated that Demick admitted to violating probation conditions two and five, when in fact the court found violations based on an evidentiary hearing and only for condition five.
The court affirmed the revocation of probation but remanded for the trial court to correct the revocation order. The notation that Demick violated condition two was a scrivener's error, and the order should be corrected to reflect only the violation of condition five as orally pronounced by the trial court.
[1] A written order revoking probation may be corrected to conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement when the written order contains scrivener's errors.
[2] A scrivener's error in a probation revocation order may be corrected on appeal to reflect the trial court's oral findings and intent.
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 court found Demick in violation of his probation after an evidentiary hearing”
Clarifies that Demick did not admit to violations; rather, the trial court made findings based on evidence presented
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDemick's probation was revoked following an evidentiary hearing. The trial court orally pronounced that Demick violated condition five of his probatio…
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 Written Order cases and more on FLexlaw
In this Anders 1 appeal, we affirm James Randy Demick’s judgments and sentences but remand for the trial court to correct two scrivener’s errors on the amended order revoking his probation. The amended order stated that Demick admitted to violating conditions two and five. But Dem-ick did not admit to violating anything; rather, the trial court found Demick in violation of his probation after an eviden-tiary hearing. Similarly, there was nothing presented at the hearing establishing that Demick violated condition two of his probation, which required him to pay monthly fees associated with the costs of his supervision. The trial court instead orally pronounced that Demick violated condition five of his probation by committing two hew law offenses. Because it is clear from the trial court’s oral pronouncement and the substantive requirements of condition five that the trial court intended to find Demick only in violation of this condition, we conclude that the trial court’s notation that Demick also violated condition two was a scrivener’s error.2 See *134 Washington v. State, 37 So.3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Demick’s probation but remand for the trial court to correct the revocation order to reflect its oral pronouncement. See Cain v. State, 49 So.3d 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
Affirmed and remanded.
LaROSE and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Washington v. State, 37 So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Jalen Shropshire v. State, 37 So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Cain v. State, 49 So. 3d 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)