KIBURIS v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

KIBURIS v. State

18 So. 3d 1254, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 15521, 2009 WL 3270844

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 14, 2009

Docket2D07-5853

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 18 So. 3d 1254 (KIBURIS 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

KIBURIS v. State, 18 So. 3d 1254, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 15521, 2009 WL 3270844 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Richard Wallace Kiburis appeals the revocation of his probation and resulting prison sentence. We affirm the judgment and sentence but remand for entry of a written order of revocation of probation.

When Mr. Kiburis attempted to correct the trial court’s failure to render a separate written order of revocation by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), the trial court denied relief stating that “collectively, the judgment and sentence constitutes [sic] a sufficient written order revoking probation to facilitate appellate review of the revocation.” We do not agree. See Moschiano v. State, 12 So.3d 922 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Dawkins v. State, 936 So.2d 710 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

Affirmed; remanded with instructions.

CASANUEVA, C.J., and ALTENBERND and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Richard Wallace Kiburis appeals the revocation of his probation and resulting prison sentence. We affirm the judgment and sentence but remand for entry of a written order of revocation of probation.

When Mr. Kiburis attempted to correct the trial court’s failure to render a separate written order of revocation by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), the trial court denied relief stating that “collectively, the judgment and sentence constitutes [sic] a sufficient written order revoking probation to facilitate appellate review of the revocation.” We do not agree. See Moschiano v. State, 12 So.3d 922 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Dawkins v. State, 936 So.2d 710 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

Affirmed; remanded with instructions.

CASANUEVA, C.J., and ALTENBERND and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 So. 3d 1254, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 15521, 2009 WL 3270844, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kiburis-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack