McCullum v. State

134 So. 3d 973, 2012 WL 1071506, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 5024
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in McCullum v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5639
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 2, 2012·No. No. 1D11-3673·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders1 appeal, we affirm Appellant’s judgment and sentence but remand for the trial court to correct the order revoking his probation. Although the State alleged that Appellant violated three conditions of his probation, the trial court found only one violation. The order of revocation of probation fails to specify which condition Appellant violated. While it is clear from the record which condition the court found Appellant violated, the finding must be memorialized in a written order. See Robinson v. State, 74 So.3d 570, 572 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (recognizing the requirement that the trial court enter a formal, written order of revocation of probation). As a result, we remand for correction of the revocation order to reflect the trial court’s oral pronouncement that Appellant violated condition five of his probation. See Nicholas v. State, 66 So.3d 1077, 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Appellant need not be present for the correction of this order. See id.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED.

BENTON, C.J., WETHERELL, and RAY, JJ., concur.

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

McCullum v. State, 134 So. 3d 973, 2012 WL 1071506, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 5024 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

134 So. 3d 973 (McCullum 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)
Robinson v. State
74 So. 3d 570 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)