SCOTT ARNONE, 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.
Scott Arnone appeals his ten-year prison sentence following probation revocation and designation as a violent felony offender of special concern (VFOSC). The appellate court affirms the revocation and sentence but remands for entry of written findings explaining how the defendant posed a danger to the community, as required by statute.
Where a court orally pronounces reasons for finding that a VFOSC poses a danger to the community, consistent with statutory factors, but fails to provide written findings, the proper remedy is to affirm the revocation and sentence but remand for entry of a written order conforming to the court's oral pronouncement.
[1] A court must make written findings as to whether a violent felony offender of special concern poses a danger to the community after a probation violation hearing.
[2] Where a court orally pronounces a reason for finding a violent felony offender of special concern poses a danger to the community but fails to provide written reasons, th…
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“If the court, after conducting the hearing required by paragraph (d), determines that a violent felony offender of special concern has committed a violation of probation or community control other than a failure to pay costs, fines, or restitution, the court shall ... [m]ake written findings as to whether or not the violent felony offender of special concern poses a danger to the community”
Establishes the statutory requirement for written findings that the defendant's court failed to satisfy.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was sentenced to ten years in prison after the circuit court revoked his probation and designated him as a VFOSC. The circuit court oral…
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 Community Sanction Violation Points cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant appeals his sentence of ten years in prison after the circuit court revoked his probation and designated him as a dangerous violent felony offender of special concern (“VFOSC”). He raises four arguments: (1) the evidence at sentencing was insufficient to support the VFOSC designation; (2) the court failed to conduct a “danger hearing” and make written findings as to whether the defendant posed a danger to the community; (3) the court improperly assessed community sanction violation points on the defendant’s scoresheet; and (4) the defendant properly preserved these issues by filing a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion.
We affirm on every argument, except one. The State properly concedes that the court failed to make written findings as to how the defendant posed a danger to the community. See § 948.06(8)(e)l, Fla. Stat. (2011) (“If the court, after conducting the hearing required by paragraph (d), determines that a violent felony offender of special concern has committed a violation of probation or community control other than a failure to pay costs, fines, or restitution, the court shall ,.. [mjake written findings as to whether or not the violent felony offender of special concern poses a danger to the community ....”) (emphasis added).
However, where a court orally pronounces a reason, consistent with one or more of the factors listed under section 948.06(8)(e)l, for its finding that the defendant, as a violent felony offender of special concern, poses a danger to the community, but fails to provide written reasons for its finding, the proper remedy is to affirm the revocation of the defendant’s probation, but remand for entry of a written order conforming to the court’s oral pronouncement. Martin v. State, 87 So.3d 813, 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Bell v. State, 150 So.3d 1214, 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014).
Consistent with our sister courts’ conclusions in Martin and Bell, we affirm the revocation of the defendant’s probation and' the resulting sentence, but remand for entry of a written order conforming to the court’s oral finding that the defendant, as a violent felony offender of special concern, poses a danger to the community. Assuming the record provides the information allowing the court to enter such a written *558order, it shall not be necessary for the court to conduct a further hearing.
Affirmed but remanded for entry of written order.
MAY and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (20 total)
-
Glenn v. State, 219 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…ocation of Appellant’s probation. But because the trial court did not reduce its reasons to writing, we reverse and remand with instruc-. tions that the trial court enter a written order that conforms to its oral pronouncements. See Arnone v. State, 204 So. 3d 556, 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016); Bell v. State, 150 [*1011] So. 3d 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014); Martin v. State, 87 So. 3d 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). We also affirm with respect to Appellant’s second, sentencing scoresheet-related argument. AFFIRMED in part, R…
-
Souza v. State, 229 So. 3d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)…ent felony offender of special concern poses a danger to the community?’ Because' the record provides the necessary information to enter such an order, we remand for-entry of a .written order conforming to the court’s oral findings. Arnone v. State, 204 So. 3d 556 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). Affirmed but remanded for entry of written order. Damoorgian and Levine, JJ., concur.…
-
Brown v. State, 225 So. 3d 399 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…community, but fails to provide written reasons for its finding, the proper remedy is to affirm the revocation of the defendant’s probation, but, remand for entry of a -written order conforming to the court’s oral pronouncement. Arnone v. State, 204 So. 3d 556, 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (citing Martin v. State, 87 So. 3d 813, 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Bell v. State, 150 So. 3d 1214, 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)). We further instruct the trial cburt to specifically identify in its supplemental, corrected order whi…
Previewing 3 of 20 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Martin v. State, 87 So. 3d 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)
- Bell v. State, 150 So. 3d 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)