Defontes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Defontes v. State

889 So. 2d 217, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 19674, 2004 WL 2952777

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 22, 2004

DocketNo. 4D04-1933

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 889 So. 2d 217 (Defontes 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

Defontes v. State, 889 So. 2d 217, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 19674, 2004 WL 2952777 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s adjudications and sentences without prejudice to file a rule 3.850 motion. Because the trial court failed to enter a written order of revocation of probation specifying the conditions appellant violated, we remand to the trial court to reduce its findings of the revocation of probation to writing. See Riley v. State, 884 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Campbell v. State, 776 So.2d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).

KLEIN, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s adjudications and sentences without prejudice to file a rule 3.850 motion. Because the trial court failed to enter a written order of revocation of probation specifying the conditions appellant violated, we remand to the trial court to reduce its findings of the revocation of probation to writing. See Riley v. State, 884 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Campbell v. State, 776 So.2d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).

KLEIN, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

889 So. 2d 217, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 19674, 2004 WL 2952777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/defontes-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack