Outlaw v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Outlaw v. State

582 So. 2d 168, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 7094, 1991 WL 126705

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 10, 1991·No. No. 90-962·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SHIVERS, Chief Judge.

Defendant, Lester Leon Outlaw, was found guilty in 1990 of two counts of resisting arrest with violence. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court orally sentenced him to concurrent terms of 3-1/2 years incarceration, and stated “[t]he court will impose a $5,000 fine in your case and in addition thereto, the court is required to impose $220 in felony costs to your case.” A written sentence, entered the same day, imposed a $5,000 fine on each count. Outlaw argues on appeal that the written sentence does not conform to the oral sentence with regard to the $5,000 fines. While it is possible, as argued by the State, that the court intended to impose two separate fines, it is clear from the oral pronouncement at the sentencing hearing that only one fine was imposed. The written sentence must therefore be remanded for correction, to conform to the oral pronouncement. Rowland v. State, 548 So.2d 812 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

SMITH and JOANOS, JJ., concur.

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

SHIVERS, Chief Judge.

Defendant, Lester Leon Outlaw, was found guilty in 1990 of two counts of resisting arrest with violence. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court orally sentenced him to concurrent terms of 3-1/2 years incarceration, and stated “[t]he court will impose a $5,000 fine in your case and in addition thereto, the court is required to impose $220 in felony costs to your case.” A written sentence, entered the same day, imposed a $5,000 fine on each count. Outlaw argues on appeal that the written sentence does not conform to the oral sentence with regard to the $5,000 fines. While it is possible, as argued by the State, that the court intended to impose two separate fines, it is clear from the oral pronouncement at the sentencing hearing that only one fine was imposed. The written sentence must therefore be remanded for correction, to conform to the oral pronouncement. Rowland v. State, 548 So.2d 812 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

SMITH and JOANOS, JJ., concur.

Outlaw v. State, 582 So. 2d 168, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 7094, 1991 WL 126705 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

582 So. 2d 168 (Outlaw v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related