Franklin v. State

826 So. 2d 456, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 13191, 2002 WL 31026972
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Franklin v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 876 So. 2d 607
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 12, 2002·No. No. 1D02-0445·Published

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. We affirm the appellant’s revocation of probation and imposition of judgment and sentence. However, we note that the record does not contain a written order of revocation of probation listing the conditions of probation violated. We thus remand for the trial court to enter such an order, consistent with its oral pronouncement. See Walker v. State, 686 So.2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). The appellant need not be present.

AFFIRMED.

WEBSTER, Van NORTWICK and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

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

Franklin v. State, 826 So. 2d 456, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 13191, 2002 WL 31026972 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

826 So. 2d 456 (Franklin 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)
Walker v. State
686 So. 2d 758 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)