RAYMOND LYLE BALDASARE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Probation Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find'that appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error; therefore the judgment appealed is affirmed.
The only point which merits discussion is the discrepancy between the trial judge’s oral findings on revoking Baldasare’s probation, and the written revocation order. The order states that Baldasare violated Conditions H and L of his probation. Yet the judge only found that Condition L had been violated and the evidence was directed solely toward the violation of that condition.
The cause is therefore remanded for the purpose of striking the words “Condition (H)” from the Order of Revocation of Probation, otherwise affirmed.
Appellant need not be present for this purpose.
GRIMES, C. J., and HOBSON and SCHEB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baker v. State, 674 So. 2d 199 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…ry. This court has consistently held that oral pronouncements must emulate the written violation of probation order. Vann v. State, 441 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); citing Chester v. State, 355 So. 2d 509 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); Baldasare v. State, 363 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). In light of this discrepancy, we remand with instructions to correct this error. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. STONE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.…
-
Vann v. State, 441 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…und him guilty of violating all five conditions. The matter will thus be remanded to the trial court so that the written order may be made to conform to the oral pronouncement. Chester v. State, 355 So. 2d 509 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); Baldasare v. State, 363 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). On appeal, the defendant raises two issues: (1) a hearsay argument and (2) an argument based on insufficient evidence regarding ability to pay. We have reviewed the matter and find no error under the hearsay point. We find it u…
-
Revear v. State, 812 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…the hearing on the violation, the trial court found Revear in violation of only condition four. However, the order of revocation of probation incorrectly states that Revear was found in violation of conditions four and eight. See Baldasare v. State, 363 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978) (remanding order of revocation of probation where there was a discrepancy between trial court’s oral findings and the written revocation order). Therefore, we remand this cause for the purpose of striking that portion of the order…