Curl v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Curl v. State

823 So. 2d 214, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10804, 2002 WL 1758289

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 31, 2002

DocketNo. 1D01-4402

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 823 So. 2d 214 (Curl 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

Curl v. State, 823 So. 2d 214, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10804, 2002 WL 1758289 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This direct criminal appeal was brought pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Having reviewed the entire record, we agree that no reversible error occurred. However, the trial court technically erred by pronouncing a violation based upon count two, which was not argued, rather than count four, which was argued. Accordingly, we remand for correction of the written order of revocation.

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN, C.J., DAVIS and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This direct criminal appeal was brought pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Having reviewed the entire record, we agree that no reversible error occurred. However, the trial court technically erred by pronouncing a violation based upon count two, which was not argued, rather than count four, which was argued. Accordingly, we remand for correction of the written order of revocation.

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN, C.J., DAVIS and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

823 So. 2d 214, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10804, 2002 WL 1758289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curl-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack