McBride v. State

842 So. 2d 216, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 4471, 2003 WL 1738416
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in McBride v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 884 So. 2d 476
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 3, 2003·No. No. 1D02-1492·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This direct criminal appeal was brought pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Upon our independent examination of the entire record, we agree that no reversible error occurred. We affirm Appellant’s revocation of probation and imposition of judgment and sentence. However, the written order of revocation of probation does not state which conditions of supervision Appellant violated, nor does the written order state the sentence imposed upon revocation. Therefore, we remand for the trial court to enter such an order, consistent with its oral pronouncement. See, e.g., Williams v. State, 832 So.2d 883 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Oliver v. State, 819 So.2d 816 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

AFFIRMED.

BOOTH, BENTON and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

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

McBride v. State, 842 So. 2d 216, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 4471, 2003 WL 1738416 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

842 So. 2d 216 (McBride 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)
Oliver v. State
819 So. 2d 816 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Williams v. State
832 So. 2d 883 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)