Glowacki v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Glowacki v. State

894 So. 2d 288, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 1358, 2005 WL 292194

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 9, 2005

DocketNo. 2D03-902

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 894 So. 2d 288 (Glowacki 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

Glowacki v. State, 894 So. 2d 288, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 1358, 2005 WL 292194 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

VILLANTI, Judge.

We affirm Mark Glowacki’s conviction for DUI causing serious bodily injury but remand for entry of an order correcting certain sentencing errors.

While Glowacki’s appeal was pending, he filed a motion to correct sentencing errors, objecting to certain costs. The trial court granted this motion but did not enter a corrected judgment and sentence. Glo-wacki argues, and the State properly concedes, that the trial court must enter a new judgment and sentence indicating the objected-to costs have been stricken. We therefore reverse and remand for the ministerial entry of a corrected judgment and sentence at which Glowacki need not be present. See Windisch v. State, 709 So.2d 606 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

CASANUEVA and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

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

VILLANTI, Judge.

We affirm Mark Glowacki’s conviction for DUI causing serious bodily injury but remand for entry of an order correcting certain sentencing errors.

While Glowacki’s appeal was pending, he filed a motion to correct sentencing errors, objecting to certain costs. The trial court granted this motion but did not enter a corrected judgment and sentence. Glo-wacki argues, and the State properly concedes, that the trial court must enter a new judgment and sentence indicating the objected-to costs have been stricken. We therefore reverse and remand for the ministerial entry of a corrected judgment and sentence at which Glowacki need not be present. See Windisch v. State, 709 So.2d 606 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

CASANUEVA and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

894 So. 2d 288, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 1358, 2005 WL 292194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glowacki-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack