Major v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Major v. State

652 So. 2d 513, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3455, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 813

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 5, 1995

DocketNo. 94-1350

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 652 So. 2d 513 (Major 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

Major v. State, 652 So. 2d 513, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3455, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 813 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

STEVENSON, Judge.

This is an appeal from a final order of revocation of probation. We affirm the findings of violation, but remand for a reduction in sentence. Specifically, appellant should be credited for the amount of time he completed on his original probations in each case so that the total probationary term already served and that which is to be served does not exceed the maximum sentence allowed for the underlying offenses. See State v. Round-tree, 644 So.2d 1358 (Fla.1994). Further, we direct the trial court to conform the written order of probation to the oral pronouncement by deleting from the written order all references to violations for failure to pay any costs other than the cost of supervision. See Avery v. State, 543 So.2d 296 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. dismissed, 553 So.2d 1164 (Fla.1989).

We have reviewed the other issues raised by appellant and find no error. Accordingly, this case is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.

GLICKSTEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

STEVENSON, Judge.

This is an appeal from a final order of revocation of probation. We affirm the findings of violation, but remand for a reduction in sentence. Specifically, appellant should be credited for the amount of time he completed on his original probations in each case so that the total probationary term already served and that which is to be served does not exceed the maximum sentence allowed for the underlying offenses. See State v. Round-tree, 644 So.2d 1358 (Fla.1994). Further, we direct the trial court to conform the written order of probation to the oral pronouncement by deleting from the written order all references to violations for failure to pay any costs other than the cost of supervision. See Avery v. State, 543 So.2d 296 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. dismissed, 553 So.2d 1164 (Fla.1989).

We have reviewed the other issues raised by appellant and find no error. Accordingly, this case is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.

GLICKSTEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

652 So. 2d 513, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3455, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/major-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack