Salmon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Salmon v. State

702 So. 2d 238, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12551, 1997 WL 716822

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 7, 1997

DocketNo. 96-04134

StatusPublished

This text of 702 So. 2d 238 (Salmon 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

Salmon v. State, 702 So. 2d 238, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12551, 1997 WL 716822 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant raises a suppression issue which he preserved for appeal and also challenges two conditions of his order of community control followed by probation. We find no merit in the suppression issue and affirm. As to the challenged conditions of the appellant’s community control and probation, we agree with the appellant on one point.

The order of community control followed by probation requires that the appellant maintain an hourly accounting of all his activities on a daily log. At sentencing, the trial court stated “you have to keep a daily log of your activities.” We agree with the appellant that this does not constitute an oral pronouncement that the appellant maintain an hourly account of his activities on a daily log. Accordingly, we strike the requirement in the order of community control and probation that the appellant maintain an hourly accounting of all of his activities. We do not strike the requirement that the appellant maintain a daily log.

Except as specified herein, the appellant’s judgment and sentence are affirmed.

FRANK and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

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

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant raises a suppression issue which he preserved for appeal and also challenges two conditions of his order of community control followed by probation. We find no merit in the suppression issue and affirm. As to the challenged conditions of the appellant’s community control and probation, we agree with the appellant on one point.

The order of community control followed by probation requires that the appellant maintain an hourly accounting of all his activities on a daily log. At sentencing, the trial court stated “you have to keep a daily log of your activities.” We agree with the appellant that this does not constitute an oral pronouncement that the appellant maintain an hourly account of his activities on a daily log. Accordingly, we strike the requirement in the order of community control and probation that the appellant maintain an hourly accounting of all of his activities. We do not strike the requirement that the appellant maintain a daily log.

Except as specified herein, the appellant’s judgment and sentence are affirmed.

FRANK and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

702 So. 2d 238, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 12551, 1997 WL 716822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salmon-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.