JERVONALD SIMILIEN
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.
When there is a conflict between the oral pronouncement and the written sentence, the oral pronouncement controls, and the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion to correct the written sentence to reflect the awarded probationary credit.
[1] When there is a conflict between the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written sentencing order, the oral pronouncement controls and the written order must be correc…
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“When there is a conflict between the oral pronouncement and the written sentence, the oral pronouncement controls.”
Court citing Webb v. State and Williams v. State in explaining the controlling legal principle.
Jervonald Similien was sentenced on multiple counts. The trial court's oral pronouncement stated that Appellant was entitled to forty-four days probat…
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 Rule 3.800 Motion 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
JERVONALD SIMILIEN,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-3476
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed June 25, 2021
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County, Donna L. Mcintosh, Judge.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Joseph Chloupek, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Nora Hutchinson Hall, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
2
We reverse and remand this cause solely for the purpose of correcting a sentencing error as to Count Three. The court’s oral pronouncement stated that Appellant was entitled to forty-four days probationary credit on that count; however, the written order failed to include that credit. “When there is a conflict between the oral pronouncement and the written sentence, the oral pronouncement controls.” Webb v. State, 302 So. 3d 1077, 1079 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020) (citing Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600, 603 (Fla. 2007)). The State commendably and correctly concedes the need for entry of a corrected written sentence. We find that the trial court erred in denying Appellant’s rule 3.800 motion seeking that correction. We remand for entry of an amended order that includes that credit and otherwise mirrors the court’s oral pronouncement. After careful consideration, we affirm as to all remaining issues.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED, to correct sentencing error.
EDWARDS, SASSO and NARDELLA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007)
- Kitchen v. State, 302 So. 3d 1077 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)