Larry v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Larry v. State

590 So. 2d 1125, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 34, 1992 WL 882

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 2, 1992

DocketNo. 91-1362

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 590 So. 2d 1125 (Larry 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

Larry v. State, 590 So. 2d 1125, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 34, 1992 WL 882 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

JOANOS, Chief Judge.

Appellant seeks review of his written judgment and sentence imposed at the re-sentencing conducted in compliance with this court’s mandate. At the resentencing proceeding, the trial court orally imposed concurrent 40-year sentences, and granted credit for five years and one hundred fourteen days time served. However, the written sentencing documents reflect credit for four years and seventy-five days time served. Appellant contends the sentence must be corrected to show the exact number of days of credit to which he is entitled. The state agrees that the written sentence must be remanded to be conformed to the oral pronouncement.

Accordingly, this cause is remanded for correction of the scrivener’s error on the sentencing documents, so as to conform them to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. See Jeffrey v. State, 456 So.2d 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

WIGGINTON and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

JOANOS, Chief Judge.

Appellant seeks review of his written judgment and sentence imposed at the re-sentencing conducted in compliance with this court’s mandate. At the resentencing proceeding, the trial court orally imposed concurrent 40-year sentences, and granted credit for five years and one hundred fourteen days time served. However, the written sentencing documents reflect credit for four years and seventy-five days time served. Appellant contends the sentence must be corrected to show the exact number of days of credit to which he is entitled. The state agrees that the written sentence must be remanded to be conformed to the oral pronouncement.

Accordingly, this cause is remanded for correction of the scrivener’s error on the sentencing documents, so as to conform them to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. See Jeffrey v. State, 456 So.2d 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

WIGGINTON and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

590 So. 2d 1125, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 34, 1992 WL 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larry-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack