Shuey v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Shuey v. State

950 So. 2d 1285, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 4300, 2007 WL 858409

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 23, 2007·No. No. 5D05-1915·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PLEUS, C.J.

We have reviewed the points raised by the defendant and find no reversible error. However, for the sake of accuracy, we point out the following matter, sua sponte. The judgment of conviction erroneously states that the defendant pled nolo contendere to the charges when he was actually convicted following a jury trial. We affirm the convictions and sentences but remand to the trial court for correction of this scrivener’s error. See, e.g., Cook v. State, 947 So.2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The defendant’s presence at such correction is unnecessary.

AFFIRMED; REMANDED.

SAWAYA and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

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

PLEUS, C.J.

We have reviewed the points raised by the defendant and find no reversible error. However, for the sake of accuracy, we point out the following matter, sua sponte. The judgment of conviction erroneously states that the defendant pled nolo contendere to the charges when he was actually convicted following a jury trial. We affirm the convictions and sentences but remand to the trial court for correction of this scrivener’s error. See, e.g., Cook v. State, 947 So.2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The defendant’s presence at such correction is unnecessary.

AFFIRMED; REMANDED.

SAWAYA and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

Shuey v. State, 950 So. 2d 1285, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 4300, 2007 WL 858409 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

950 So. 2d 1285 (Shuey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related