JOHN LUKE HENRY
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A revocation order must be corrected to reflect only the violations actually found at the probation revocation hearing.
[1] A probation revocation order must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement at the probation hearing when the written order lists more violations than were actual…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Although there were only two violations of condition 5 remaining before the trial court at the hearing, the revocation order shows four violations of condition 5. Therefore, we remand for correction of the revocation order to reflect only two violations of condition 5.”
Court's explanation for remanding the case
John Luke Henry's probation was revoked based on alleged violations of a condition of his drug offender probation. At the VOP hearing, the state initi…
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 Drug Offender Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
SILBERMAN, Judge.
In this appeal filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
we affirm the revocation of John Luke Henry's drug offender probation and resulting sentence for dealing in stolen property. We remand only for the trial court to correct the written revocation order.
An amended violation of probation (VOP) affidavit alleged five new law violations that constituted violations of condition 5 of Henry's probation. At the VOP hearing, the State informed the court it would proceed on four of the five new law offenses as violations. After Henry admitted that he entered a plea to two of the charges (battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest with violence) and had received six months in jail on them, the State informed the court it was striking the two conditions to which he did not enter a plea. Thus, only two violations remained.
The trial court found Henry in violation based on the new law violations and revoked his probation.
Although there were only two violations of condition 5 remaining before the trial court at the hearing, the revocation order shows four violations of condition 5.
Therefore, we remand for correction of the revocation order to reflect only two violations of condition 5. See Allen v. State, 228 So. 3d 681, 681-82 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (remanding for correction of revocation order to conform to the oral pronouncement).
Affirmed and remanded.
CASANUEVA 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)
- Morgan v. State, 228 So. 3d 681 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)
- Ciera Monique Allen v. State, 228 So. 3d 681 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)