Bartley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bartley v. State

675 So. 2d 246, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6531, 1996 WL 332911

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 19, 1996·No. No. 95-3150·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a written plea of nolo conten-dere, appellant, Floyd Bartley, was sen-fenced to one year in the county jail to be followed by a term of probation. Appellant challenges certain conditions of probation which were contained in the written order of [247] probation but were not orally pronounced at trial. We strike the condition requiring appellant to pay for his random drug testing because this condition was not orally pronounced and is not a general condition of probation. Catholic v. State, 632 So.2d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). In all other respects, we affirm.

DELL, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a written plea of nolo conten-dere, appellant, Floyd Bartley, was sen-fenced to one year in the county jail to be followed by a term of probation. Appellant challenges certain conditions of probation which were contained in the written order of [247] probation but were not orally pronounced at trial. We strike the condition requiring appellant to pay for his random drug testing because this condition was not orally pronounced and is not a general condition of probation. Catholic v. State, 632 So.2d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). In all other respects, we affirm.

DELL, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Bartley v. State, 675 So. 2d 246, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6531, 1996 WL 332911 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

675 So. 2d 246 (Bartley v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related