Chester v. State

355 So. 2d 509
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 24, 1978
Docket77-1534
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 355 So. 2d 509 (Chester 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
Chester v. State, 355 So. 2d 509 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

355 So.2d 509 (1978)

Willie James CHESTER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1534.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 24, 1978.

Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, Bartow, and Wayne Chalu, Asst. Public Defender, Tampa, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard G. Pippinger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error; therefore, the revocation of appellant's probation is affirmed.

However, we remand this case to the trial court to correct imperfections in both the order of revocation of probation and in the sentence. The affidavit filed against appellant alleged violations of conditions (4), (7), and (9), of the conditions of probation. During the course of the revocation hearing, the trial court granted appellant's motion for a judgment of acquittal as to the alleged violations of conditions (7) and (9), but ruled that the allegation pertaining to the alleged violation of condition (4) was sustained. Yet the written order revoking appellant's probation recited that appellant violated conditions (7) and (9) as well as condition (4). Since the court's order of revocation enlarged upon the announced findings of the trial court, the order must be corrected to conform to the findings of the trial court made at the hearing. Sing Eng v. State, 350 So.2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Also, the phrase "at hard labor" in the sentence is improper. Brooks v. State, 349 So.2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).

Remanded for correction of the sentence and the order of revocation of probation; otherwise affirmed. Appellant need not be present for this purpose.

BOARDMAN, C.J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Howard v. State
678 So. 2d 874 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Baker v. State
674 So. 2d 199 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Vann v. State
441 So. 2d 1174 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Coleman v. State
414 So. 2d 20 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Schultz v. State
411 So. 2d 892 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Sandstrom v. State
390 So. 2d 448 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
355 So. 2d 509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chester-v-state-fladistctapp-1978.