Aponte v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Aponte v. State

595 So. 2d 584, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3305, 1992 WL 57885

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 25, 1992·No. No. 91-01151·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The only point raised in this appeal challenges the validity of conditions 6, 9, 10, 18 and 19 which were imposed in the written order of probation. We strike these special conditions of probation because they did not conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence imposed at the sentencing hearing. Labar v. State, 584 So.2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).

Affirmed, except remanded for conformance of the sentence to the oral pronouncement.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The only point raised in this appeal challenges the validity of conditions 6, 9, 10, 18 and 19 which were imposed in the written order of probation. We strike these special conditions of probation because they did not conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence imposed at the sentencing hearing. Labar v. State, 584 So.2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).

Affirmed, except remanded for conformance of the sentence to the oral pronouncement.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Aponte v. State, 595 So. 2d 584, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3305, 1992 WL 57885 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

595 So. 2d 584 (Aponte v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related