N.P.L. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

N.P.L. v. State

819 So. 2d 254, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8576, 2002 WL 1338037

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 20, 2002

DocketNo. 1D01-2742

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 819 So. 2d 254 (N.P.L. 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

N.P.L. v. State, 819 So. 2d 254, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8576, 2002 WL 1338037 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this juvenile delinquency appeal, we vacate the amended disposition orders entered, and remand with directions that the trial court enter a separate order for each offense, rather than each case. E.g., K.L.P. v. State, 783 So.2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (and cases cited therein); J.M.J. v. State, 742 So.2d 261, 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Because it appears that appellant had served the maximum commitment permitted by law for the second-degree misdemeanor offenses before the second affidavit of violation of probation was filed, see § 985.231(1)(d), Fla. Stat. (1999), the trial court may not enter orders relating to those offenses. Appellant need not be present for these purely ministerial acts.

[255]*255DISPOSITION ORDERS VACATED and REMANDED, with directions.

BARFIELD, WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this juvenile delinquency appeal, we vacate the amended disposition orders entered, and remand with directions that the trial court enter a separate order for each offense, rather than each case. E.g., K.L.P. v. State, 783 So.2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (and cases cited therein); J.M.J. v. State, 742 So.2d 261, 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Because it appears that appellant had served the maximum commitment permitted by law for the second-degree misdemeanor offenses before the second affidavit of violation of probation was filed, see § 985.231(1)(d), Fla. Stat. (1999), the trial court may not enter orders relating to those offenses. Appellant need not be present for these purely ministerial acts.

[255]*255DISPOSITION ORDERS VACATED and REMANDED, with directions.

BARFIELD, WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

819 So. 2d 254, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8576, 2002 WL 1338037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/npl-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack