Fletcher v. State

693 So. 2d 724, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5625, 1997 WL 271317
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Fletcher v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 699 So. 2d 346
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 23, 1997·No. No. 96-3618·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders appeal,1 we find on the face of the record that there is a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and the written sentence. It appears' to us that the discrepancy relating to the concurrent nature of the sentence is the result of a scrivener’s error. However, in order to resolve any uncertainty, we remand for the trial court to resolve the discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and the written order. Aquino v. State, 661 So.2d 424 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Higginbotham v. State, 659 So.2d 461 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Marchand v. State, 546 So.2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Wilkins v. State, 543 So.2d 800 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 554 So.2d 1170 (Fla.1989). In all other respects, the convictions and sentences are affirmed.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED.

DAUKSCH, GOSHORN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

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

Fletcher v. State, 693 So. 2d 724, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5625, 1997 WL 271317 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

693 So. 2d 724 (Fletcher v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Wilkins v. State
543 So. 2d 800 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Marchand v. State
546 So. 2d 1184 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Higginbotham v. State
659 So. 2d 461 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Aquino v. State
661 So. 2d 424 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)