A.R. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

A.R. v. State

504 So. 2d 66, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 877, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7399

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 25, 1987·No. No. 85-1931·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, a juvenile, appeals from his sentence for grand theft.

Defendant’s first point on appeal is that restitution was improper. We disagree. See J.S.H. v. State, 472 So.2d 737, 738 (Fla.1985).

Defendant’s second point, which the state concedes, is that the written order should conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of twenty-four hours of community service work and that the term of community control should be specified m accordance with F.R. v. State, 473 So.2d 785 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We agree.

The cause is remanded for correction of the sentence in accordance with this opinion.

LEHAN, A.C.J., SANDERLIN, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F., (Ret.) J., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, a juvenile, appeals from his sentence for grand theft.

Defendant’s first point on appeal is that restitution was improper. We disagree. See J.S.H. v. State, 472 So.2d 737, 738 (Fla.1985).

Defendant’s second point, which the state concedes, is that the written order should conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement of twenty-four hours of community service work and that the term of community control should be specified m accordance with F.R. v. State, 473 So.2d 785 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We agree.

The cause is remanded for correction of the sentence in accordance with this opinion.

LEHAN, A.C.J., SANDERLIN, J., and BOARDMAN, EDWARD F., (Ret.) J., concur.

A.R. v. State, 504 So. 2d 66, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 877, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7399 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

504 So. 2d 66 (A.R. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related