Banks v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Banks v. State

536 So. 2d 1093, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2522, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4968, 1988 WL 120932

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 16, 1988

DocketNo. 88-0501

StatusPublished

This text of 536 So. 2d 1093 (Banks v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Banks v. State, 536 So. 2d 1093, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2522, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4968, 1988 WL 120932 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of an order of revocation of probation and sentence to six months’ community control, followed by a term of probation for the offense of aggravated assault. In addition, he was ordered to pay a sum for court costs and a sum to the Crime Compensation Fund.

It is contended that the trial court orally found appellant had violated his probation on only three of the five grounds charged; whereas, the judgment included all of the five grounds by simply referring to the affidavit of probation violations. Additionally, appellant points out that the assessment of costs against appellant without prior notice was improper.

Accordingly, we affirm the order revoking appellant’s probation on the grounds orally stated by the court and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to strike from the judgment any reference to the other grounds in the affidavit of probation violation. Furthermore, the assessment of costs contained in the sentence should also be stricken by the court on remand. As so amended, the judgment and sentence appealed from is affirmed.

DOWNEY, LETTS and STONE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of an order of revocation of probation and sentence to six months’ community control, followed by a term of probation for the offense of aggravated assault. In addition, he was ordered to pay a sum for court costs and a sum to the Crime Compensation Fund.

It is contended that the trial court orally found appellant had violated his probation on only three of the five grounds charged; whereas, the judgment included all of the five grounds by simply referring to the affidavit of probation violations. Additionally, appellant points out that the assessment of costs against appellant without prior notice was improper.

Accordingly, we affirm the order revoking appellant’s probation on the grounds orally stated by the court and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to strike from the judgment any reference to the other grounds in the affidavit of probation violation. Furthermore, the assessment of costs contained in the sentence should also be stricken by the court on remand. As so amended, the judgment and sentence appealed from is affirmed.

DOWNEY, LETTS and STONE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

536 So. 2d 1093, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2522, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4968, 1988 WL 120932, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/banks-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.