KENNETH G. MARTIN
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 findings of willful probation violation and danger to the community are supported by competent substantial evidence and affirmed, though the judgment's title must be corrected to reflect revocation rather than modification.
[1] A trial court's judgment revoking probation must be titled to accurately reflect revocation rather than modification, and such clerical errors may be corrected on remand…
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 intelligenceKenneth Martin was found to have willfully violated material terms and conditions of his probation and was deemed a danger to the community at a proba…
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 Scrivener'S Error cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
KENNETH G. MARTIN,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-922
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed February 21, 2020
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County, Greg A. Tynan, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Kathryn Rollison Radtke, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Wesley Heidt, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
HARRIS, J.
Kenneth Martin appeals the judgment and sentence imposed by the trial court following a violation of probation hearing. The trial court found Martin willfully violated the material terms and conditions of his probation and he was a danger to the community. Because these findings are supported by competent substantial evidence, we affirm on these grounds.
2
However, the court’s judgment was incorrectly labeled “Order of Modification/Restoration of Probation.” Both parties concede this was a scrivener’s error. We agree that the judgment should be amended so that the title reflects the order is revoking Martin’s probation, and we remand to the trial court for this limited purpose. See Daniels v. State, 200 So. 3d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). Martin does not need to be present when this occurs. See Hayes v. State, 927 So. 2d 15, 16 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).
AFFIRMED and REMANDED. WALLIS and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Reji Smith v. State, 200 So. 3d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)
- Vixamar v. State, 927 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)