Oliver v. State
422 So. 2d 368, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28736
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Oliver v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 379 So. 2d 143 →
Opinion
No doubt through inadvertence, the trial court found appellant had violated his probation as set forth in Counts I, II, III, and IV. Actually, the State withdrew Count II, as it was unable to offer any proof of the facts alleged therein. On appeal the State concedes appellant should not have been violated on said count.
Accordingly, the order appealed from is modified to delete any reference to Count II and, as so modified, the order and sentence is affirmed.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Oliver v. State, 422 So. 2d 368, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28736 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).
422 So. 2d 368 (Oliver v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.