King v. State

606 So. 2d 513, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11331, 1992 WL 312763
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in King v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 557 So. 2d 899
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 29, 1992·No. No. 91-2759·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, the public defender has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Based upon our independent review of the record on appeal, we agree that no good-faith argument can be made that reversible error occurred in the trial court. Accordingly, we affirm appellant's convictions and sentence.

[514]*514However, we note that the judgment contains a scrivener’s error. While it correctly reflects that appellant was convicted of two counts of resisting an officer with violence, it incorrectly lists the statute number for that offense as Section 893.01. The correct statute number for the offense of resisting an officer with violence is Section 843.01. On remand, the trial court is directed to correct this error.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED, with directions.

BOOTH, SHIVERS and WEBSTER, JJ„ concur.

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

King v. State, 606 So. 2d 513, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11331, 1992 WL 312763 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

606 So. 2d 513 (King 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)