Potter v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Potter v. State

710 So. 2d 754, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5949, 1998 WL 264003

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Potter v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13774 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 27, 1998·No. No. 97-1259·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The state acknowledges that the written adjudication erroneously reflects that Appellant was found guilty as to count I. The trial court, recognizing that it could not sentence Appellant on both count I and count II, orally adjudicated him guilty only with regard to counts II, III, and IV. We recognize that the court did not sentence Appellant as to count I; nevertheless, we reverse and remand so that the trial court may vacate the adjudication as to count I. In all other respects, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

STONE, C.J., and FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The state acknowledges that the written adjudication erroneously reflects that Appellant was found guilty as to count I. The trial court, recognizing that it could not sentence Appellant on both count I and count II, orally adjudicated him guilty only with regard to counts II, III, and IV. We recognize that the court did not sentence Appellant as to count I; nevertheless, we reverse and remand so that the trial court may vacate the adjudication as to count I. In all other respects, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

STONE, C.J., and FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Potter v. State, 710 So. 2d 754, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5949, 1998 WL 264003 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

710 So. 2d 754 (Potter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.