Norton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Norton v. State

556 So. 2d 1234, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1091, 1990 WL 15906

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 21, 1990

DocketNo. 88-02761

StatusPublished

This text of 556 So. 2d 1234 (Norton 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

Norton v. State, 556 So. 2d 1234, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1091, 1990 WL 15906 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals his judgment and sentence following violation of community control. We affirm the judgment. We also affirm the sentence, but remand for [1235]*1235correction of two technical errors. The state initially charged the defendant with both delivery and possession of a single quantity of cannabis during a single episode on February 19, 1988.

When he entered his voluntary plea of nolo contendere to the count of delivery, it was agreed that the count of possession would be dismissed. It was not dismissed, but rather was harmlessly included in the scoresheet. On remand, an order dismissing the possession count must be entered and the scoresheet corrected. Likewise, the record is clear that the defendant’s community control was revoked, but no separate order of revocation has been entered indicating the conditions violated. Brown v. State, 429 So.2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Thus, on remand this oversight must also be corrected.

Affirmed with instructions on remand.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PARKER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals his judgment and sentence following violation of community control. We affirm the judgment. We also affirm the sentence, but remand for [1235]*1235correction of two technical errors. The state initially charged the defendant with both delivery and possession of a single quantity of cannabis during a single episode on February 19, 1988.

When he entered his voluntary plea of nolo contendere to the count of delivery, it was agreed that the count of possession would be dismissed. It was not dismissed, but rather was harmlessly included in the scoresheet. On remand, an order dismissing the possession count must be entered and the scoresheet corrected. Likewise, the record is clear that the defendant’s community control was revoked, but no separate order of revocation has been entered indicating the conditions violated. Brown v. State, 429 So.2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Thus, on remand this oversight must also be corrected.

Affirmed with instructions on remand.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PARKER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

556 So. 2d 1234, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1091, 1990 WL 15906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norton-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack