ADRIAN WEBB
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 trial court's probation revocation order must accurately reflect the findings made at the revocation hearing, and when the written order contradicts those findings, the order must be corrected on remand.
[1] A probation revocation order must accurately reflect the trial court's findings at the revocation hearing, and discrepancies between the trial court's stated findings and…
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 intelligenceAdrian Webb appealed three consolidated probation revocation orders from a single hearing. The State alleged five new law violations and a special con…
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 Special Conditions Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Nos. 1D17-5319 1D18-0150 1D18-0151 _____________________________
ADRIAN WEBB,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee. _____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. James C. Hankinson, Judge.
October 31, 2018
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges three orders revoking his probation in three separate cases. We consolidate these cases for purposes of this opinion, as all three orders stem from the same hearing and the same allegations presented by the State. We affirm but write only to address an error in the written orders revoking appellant’s probation. Appellant contested the State’s allegations that he violated his probation by committing five new law offenses and violating a special condition of his probation. After a hearing the trial court found appellant only committed three new law violations and did
2
not violate the special condition. However, the trial court’s three revocation of probation orders state that appellant admitted to all five new law violations and a violation of the special condition. We AFFIRM the trial court’s orders without further comment, and REMAND the cases for entry of corrected revocation of probation orders. Enno v. State, 59 So. 3d 149 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). WOLF, LEWIS, and ROWE, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for Appellee.