Sherrell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sherrell v. State

215 So. 3d 661, 2017 WL 1422659, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5533

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 21, 2017

DocketCase No. 5D16-3337

StatusPublished

This text of 215 So. 3d 661 (Sherrell 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

Sherrell v. State, 215 So. 3d 661, 2017 WL 1422659, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5533 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Kamari Sherrell appeals the trial court’s order revoking his probation. Although the trial court orally pronounced that Sherrell violated conditions 6 and 7, its order does not state in writing the conditions that Sherrell violated. We find that competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s oral findings which, if written, would “have been adequate to sustain the trial court’s conclusion of a willful and substantial violation.” Patt v. State, 876 So.2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order revoking Sherrell’s probation, but we remand for the entry of a proper adjudication order identifying which conditions Sherrell violated.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED with Instructions.

COHEN, C.J., EVANDER, and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Kamari Sherrell appeals the trial court’s order revoking his probation. Although the trial court orally pronounced that Sherrell violated conditions 6 and 7, its order does not state in writing the conditions that Sherrell violated. We find that competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s oral findings which, if written, would “have been adequate to sustain the trial court’s conclusion of a willful and substantial violation.” Patt v. State, 876 So.2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order revoking Sherrell’s probation, but we remand for the entry of a proper adjudication order identifying which conditions Sherrell violated.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED with Instructions.

COHEN, C.J., EVANDER, and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 So. 3d 661, 2017 WL 1422659, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5533, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherrell-v-state-fladistctapp-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack