Brister v. State
This text of 562 So. 2d 452 (Brister 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.
Opinion
Appellant seeks correction of a scrivener’s error existing in the probation order entered after the oral pronouncement of the sentence by the trial court. Following a plea of nolo contendere to two counts of grand theft, the appellant was sentenced to 2 years incarceration followed by 2 years probation on one count and 2 years probation on the other count.
The probation order prepared following the oral pronouncement of the sentence indicated that appellant was to be committed to the Department of Corrections for a term of 4V2 years instead of the 4 years pronounced by the court.1 The state concedes this scrivener’s error.
Accordingly, the probation order in Circuit Court Case No. 89-3441 is modified to show that the total of the probationary [453]*453split sentence is 4 years rather than 4¾⅛ years. Cf. Nobile v. State, 542 So.2d 1066 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Wynn v. State, 394 So.2d 225 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).
As corrected, the judgment and sentence and probation orders are affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
562 So. 2d 452, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 4566, 1990 WL 86938, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brister-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.