McCullum v. State
This text of 134 So. 3d 973 (McCullum 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.
Opinion
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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
134 So. 3d 973, 2012 WL 1071506, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 5024, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccullum-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.