J.A.L.
v.
STATE
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.
The appellate court affirmed a juvenile's guilty plea and disposition for grand theft and dealing in stolen property but remanded for correction of the written order to reflect that one count of grand theft was merged with another count.
The appellate court affirmed the disposition but remanded for the trial court to enter a written order that accurately reflects the merger of the fourth count of grand theft with the dealing in stolen property count, as stated in the plea hearing transcript.
[1] In an Anders review, remand is appropriate to require the trial court to enter a written order accurately reflecting the resolution of merged counts when such merger is e…
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“Having reviewed the record in keeping with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we affirm the disposition rendered after J.A.L. pleaded guilty to counts of grand theft of an automobile and dealing in stolen property, his withhold of adjudication after a disposition hearing on a third count for burglary of a dwelling, and his placement on juvenile probation for the various counts.”
Establishes the court's review standard and the general affirmation of the lower court's actions regarding the plea and disposition.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ.A.L. pleaded guilty to grand theft of an automobile and dealing in stolen property. The trial court withheld adjudication of guilt for burglary of a…
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 Third Degree Grand Theft cases and more on FLexlaw
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
J.A.L., ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4512 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) )
Opinion filed March 6, 2019.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; James Pierce, Judge.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Kevin Briggs, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Having reviewed the record in keeping with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738 (1967), we affirm the disposition rendered after J.A.L. pleaded guilty to counts of grand theft of an automobile and dealing in stolen property, his withhold of adjudication after a disposition hearing on a third count for burglary of a dwelling, and his placement on juvenile probation for the various counts. We remand only for the trial court to enter a written order reflecting that the fourth count—grand theft—was merged with the dealing in stolen property count at the time of the plea as stated in the transcript of the plea hearing. See generally Lenker v. State, 151 So. 3d 1273 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (affirming but remanding in an Anders proceeding for entry of a written record accurately reflecting the resolution of the various counts).
Affirmed; remanded with instructions.
KELLY and SALARIO, JJ., and CASE, JAMES R., ASSOCIATE SENIOR JUDGE, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McGraw v. State, 245 So. 3d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited (14 total)
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (U.S. 1976)
- Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (U.S. 1966)
- Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85 (U.S. 1979)
- United States v. Johnson, 457 U.S. 537 (U.S. 1982)
- Illinois v. Krull, 480 U.S. 340 (U.S. 1987)
- Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (U.S. 2011)
- Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1995)
- Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (U.S. 2009)
- Missouri v. McNEELY., 569 U.S. 141 (U.S. 2013)