Santangelo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Santangelo v. State

219 So. 3d 1000, 2017 WL 2438338, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8151

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 6, 2017·No. CASE NO. 1D16-2086·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s judgment and sentence are affirmed. However, we remand for correction of the scrivener’s error contained in the probation ■ revocation order, which states that the appellant violated “Condition [] 2” of her probation rather than “Modification of Probation Condition (2).” See Nickolas v. State, 66 So.3d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).

AFFIRMED; REMANDED for correction of scrivener’s error in probation revocation order.

ROBERTS, C.J., ROWE and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s judgment and sentence are affirmed. However, we remand for correction of the scrivener’s error contained in the probation ■ revocation order, which states that the appellant violated “Condition [] 2” of her probation rather than “Modification of Probation Condition (2).” See Nickolas v. State, 66 So.3d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).

AFFIRMED; REMANDED for correction of scrivener’s error in probation revocation order.

ROBERTS, C.J., ROWE and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.

Santangelo v. State, 219 So. 3d 1000, 2017 WL 2438338, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8151 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

219 So. 3d 1000 (Santangelo v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related