ANTHONY EARL CRIM, JR.
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 written sentence that conflicts with the oral pronouncement of sentence is illegal, and when a discrepancy exists, the oral pronouncement controls and the written sentence must be corrected to conform.
[1] When a discrepancy exists between the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written sentence, the oral pronouncement controls and the written sentence must be corrected…
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“A written sentence that conflicts with the oral pronouncement of sentence imposed in open court is an illegal sentence.”
Court citing Beard v. State, 27 So. 3d 186, 187 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)
The trial court orally pronounced a sentence of twelve months' probation on Count 1 with forty-two days in jail (minus four days' credit for time serv…
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 Appeal From Conviction And Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No. 5D2024-2501 L.T. Case No. 2024-MM-000364-A
ANTHONY EARL CRIM, JR.,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
On appeal from the County Court for Marion County. Thomas P. Thompson, III, Judge.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Darnelle Paige Lawshe, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kaylee Danielle Tatman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
July 24, 2026
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders¹ appeal, we affirm the judgment and sentence. However, the written sentence contains a scrivener's error harmful to Appellant which should be corrected upon remand as to Count
1. “A written sentence that conflicts with the oral pronouncement of sentence imposed in open court is an illegal sentence.” Beard v. State, 27 So. 3d 186, 187 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (citing Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600, 603 (Fla. 2007)). “When a discrepancy exists, the oral pronouncement controls over the written.” Id.
In this case, the record reveals that the trial court orally pronounced a sentence on Count 1 of twelve months' probation, with a special condition that the first forty-two days (minus four days' credit for time served) be served in the Marion County Jail. On Counts 2 through 5, the trial court imposed consecutive twelve months' probation on each count, with a special condition that four days be served in jail with credit on each count of four days' time served.
The written sentence, though, shows a jail sentence of fortytwo days and twelve months' probation for Count 1, and twelve months' probation and a four-day jail term for each of Counts 2 through 5, which are illegal sentences because they are inconsistent with the oral pronouncement and also exceed the statutory maximum for each count. The written sentence should be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement.
AFFIRMED; REMANDED for correction of scrivener's error.
EISNAUGLE, KILBANE, and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007)
- Beard v. State, 27 So. 3d 186 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)