Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Graham v. State

Graham v. State

680 So. 2d 535, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6327, 1996 WL 325109
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Graham v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 658 So. 2d 642 →
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 13, 1996·No. No. 95-3338·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is remanded for correction of the restitution order to reflect the amount of restitution orally pronounced. See Trueblood v. State, 635 So.2d 1024, 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (“It is well-settled that the oral pronouncement of a sentence prevails over the written judgment and sentence form.”). See also R.S. v. State, 664 So.2d 1113 (Fla. 2d [536]*536DCA 1995) (remanding for correction of restitution order to reflect amount orally pronounced at sentencing). The trial court orally imposed restitution of $200. Apparently due to a scrivener’s error, the written order imposes a restitution amount of $2,000.

MINER, ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

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

Graham v. State, 680 So. 2d 535, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6327, 1996 WL 325109 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

680 So. 2d 535 (Graham v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Trueblood v. State
635 So. 2d 1024 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
R.S. v. State
664 So. 2d 1113 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)