Dunklin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dunklin v. State

135 So. 3d 349, 2013 WL 6097543, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 18526

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 20, 2013·No. No. 1D13-2512·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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). Finding no reversible error, we affirm the revocation of Appellant’s probation and the judgment and sentence. However, because the record provides no indication that the trial court entered a written order of revocation of probation, we remand for the trial court to enter such an order. See Pressley v. State, 903 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Hallman v. State, 845 So.2d 265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED and REMANDED with directions.

LEWIS, C.J., BENTON and SWANSON, 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). Finding no reversible error, we affirm the revocation of Appellant’s probation and the judgment and sentence. However, because the record provides no indication that the trial court entered a written order of revocation of probation, we remand for the trial court to enter such an order. See Pressley v. State, 903 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Hallman v. State, 845 So.2d 265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED and REMANDED with directions.

LEWIS, C.J., BENTON and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

Dunklin v. State, 135 So. 3d 349, 2013 WL 6097543, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 18526 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

135 So. 3d 349 (Dunklin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related