Dorival v. State
768 So. 2d 1233, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 12709, 2000 WL 1471773
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 4, 2000·No. No. 3D99-3012·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
We affirm the defendant’s conviction in all respects. See U.S. v. Wilson, 421 U.S. 309, 95 S.Ct. 1802, 44 L.Ed.2d 186 (1975); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.830 (1999). However, as the State concedes, there was a scrivener’s error in the written judgment which stated that the defendant was found guilty of direct criminal contempt rather than indirect criminal contempt. Accordingly, we affirm and remand to the lower court to correct this error.
Affirmed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dorival v. State, 768 So. 2d 1233, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 12709, 2000 WL 1471773 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).
768 So. 2d 1233 (Dorival v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Graves v. State
872 So. 2d 298 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)