McRae v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McRae v. State

592 So. 2d 803, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 907, 1992 WL 20014

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 5, 1992·No. No. 91-00678·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant’s sentences are affirmed. See Manuel v. State, 582 So.2d 823 (Fla.2d DCA 1991); Jackson v. State, 556 So.2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). We strike special condition number six contained in the written orders of probation because that condition was not announced at sentencing. See Williams v. State, 542 So.2d 479 (Fla.2d DCA 1989).

FRANK, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant’s sentences are affirmed. See Manuel v. State, 582 So.2d 823 (Fla.2d DCA 1991); Jackson v. State, 556 So.2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). We strike special condition number six contained in the written orders of probation because that condition was not announced at sentencing. See Williams v. State, 542 So.2d 479 (Fla.2d DCA 1989).

FRANK, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

McRae v. State, 592 So. 2d 803, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 907, 1992 WL 20014 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

592 So. 2d 803 (McRae v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related