Powers v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Powers v. State

609 So. 2d 176, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12782, 1992 WL 371611

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 16, 1992

DocketNo. 92-00634

StatusPublished

This text of 609 So. 2d 176 (Powers 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

Powers v. State, 609 So. 2d 176, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12782, 1992 WL 371611 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from a judgment and sentence following revocation of probation.

In circuit court case 88-605, appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere to burglary of structure, a third-degree felony, and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment followed by probation. Following release from prison, appellant admitted to a violation of probation and was sentenced to a new term. However, the new judgment form was changed to indicate that appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere to burglary of an occupied structure, a second-degree felony. On remand, this apparent scrivener’s error must be corrected to reflect a conviction of burglary of a structure, a third-degree felony.

Accordingly, we must remand the judgment form for correction of the scrivener’s error, and in all other respects, we affirm.

BOOTH, BARFIELD and MINER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from a judgment and sentence following revocation of probation.

In circuit court case 88-605, appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere to burglary of structure, a third-degree felony, and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment followed by probation. Following release from prison, appellant admitted to a violation of probation and was sentenced to a new term. However, the new judgment form was changed to indicate that appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere to burglary of an occupied structure, a second-degree felony. On remand, this apparent scrivener’s error must be corrected to reflect a conviction of burglary of a structure, a third-degree felony.

Accordingly, we must remand the judgment form for correction of the scrivener’s error, and in all other respects, we affirm.

BOOTH, BARFIELD and MINER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

609 So. 2d 176, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12782, 1992 WL 371611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powers-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.