Kadyebo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kadyebo v. State

15 So. 3d 928, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 10973, 2009 WL 2407661

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 7, 2009

Docket5D08-2008

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 15 So. 3d 928 (Kadyebo 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

Kadyebo v. State, 15 So. 3d 928, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 10973, 2009 WL 2407661 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

MONACO, C.J.

The appellant, Emanuel Kadyebo, seeks review of the sentence he received after the trial court’s revocation of his probation. We find no error and affirm. We note, however, that there appears to be no written order that comports with the oral pronouncements made by the trial judge in open court concerning which conditions of probation were violated. While we recognize that the trial court made findings from the bench that were supported by competent, substantial evidence, the appellant is unquestionably entitled to a correct written revocation order that conforms to the oral pronouncements finding him in willful violation of probation. See Young v. State, 4 So.3d 1265 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009); Patt v. State, 876 So.2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Brown v. State, 847 So.2d 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of probation and the sentence announced, but remand this *929 matter to the trial court for entry of a proper violation order.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN and TORPY, JJ., concur.

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

MONACO, C.J.

The appellant, Emanuel Kadyebo, seeks review of the sentence he received after the trial court’s revocation of his probation. We find no error and affirm. We note, however, that there appears to be no written order that comports with the oral pronouncements made by the trial judge in open court concerning which conditions of probation were violated. While we recognize that the trial court made findings from the bench that were supported by competent, substantial evidence, the appellant is unquestionably entitled to a correct written revocation order that conforms to the oral pronouncements finding him in willful violation of probation. See Young v. State, 4 So.3d 1265 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009); Patt v. State, 876 So.2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Brown v. State, 847 So.2d 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of probation and the sentence announced, but remand this *929 matter to the trial court for entry of a proper violation order.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN and TORPY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 So. 3d 928, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 10973, 2009 WL 2407661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kadyebo-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack