RICHARD SING ENG, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 court affirmed the revocation of probation but remanded for correction of the sentencing credit and the order of revocation.
Appellant's probation was revoked based on alleged violations. The trial court found violations of condition (e) but not (c), yet the written order st…
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 Sentencing Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Upon review of the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate any reversible error; therefore, the revocation of appellant’s probation is affirmed. However, the judgment and sentence of the court, while indicating that appellant is to receive credit for all time served in jail, does not specifically set forth the amount of credit time to be allowed as required by Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975). Smith v. State, 310 So. 2d 770 (Fla.2d DCA 1975).
In addition, the order of revocation of probation must be corrected. The affidavit filed against appellant charged him with two violations of condition (e) and one violation of condition (c). At the conclusion of the revocation hearing, the trial court found that the allegations as to condition (e) had been sustained, but made no mention of the allegation as to condition (c). Yet the written order revoking appellant’s probation recites that appellant violated both conditions (c) and (e). Since the court’s order of revocation enlarged the announced findings, the order must be corrected to conform to the findings of the court made at the hearing.
Remanded for correction of the sentence and the order of revocation of probation; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.
SCHEB, Acting C. J., and OTT and RYDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Sterling Sampson v. State, 375 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)…, and (11) must be stricken from the order. The trial court did not pronounce a finding of violation of condition (4), but added that finding in its written order. The written order must conform to the court’s oral pronouncement. Sing Eng v. State, 350 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Violation of condition (7) was alleged because appellant did not comply with the supervisor’s instruction to pay $10 per [*326] month toward the public defender’s fee. There was no proof before the court to indicate whether appe…
-
Sandstrom v. State, 390 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…the oral pronouncement. Byrd v. State, 388 So. 2d 1362 (Fla.5th DCA 1980); Towson v. State, 382 So. 2d 870 (Fla.5th DCA 1980); Sampson v. State, 375 So. 2d 325 (Fla.2d DCA 1979); Chester v. State, 355 So. 2d 509 (Fla.2d DCA 1978); Sing Eng v. State, 350 So. 2d 559 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). REMANDED for correction of the sentence; otherwise AFFIRMED. DOWNEY, HERSEY and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.…
-
Brown v. State, 429 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…of probation were violated. We agree that the written order must be corrected to reflect which conditions were violated. Dunlap v. State, 405 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); see Evans v. State, 356 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Sing Eng v. State, 350 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Brown’s other contentions are without merit. We therefore AFFIRM the revocation of probation but REMAND the case so that the trial court may strike those conditions alleged to have been violated, but which lack an evidentiary b…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 310 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
- Odom v. State, 310 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)