Stevens v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stevens v. State

502 So. 2d 99, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 490, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6679

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 12, 1987

DocketNo. 86-1252

StatusPublished

This text of 502 So. 2d 99 (Stevens 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

Stevens v. State, 502 So. 2d 99, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 490, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6679 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction of burglary of a structure and grand theft. Burglary of an unoccupied non-dwelling structure is a third-degree felony. Because this is what the appellant was charged with and found guilty of, the typographical error in the judgment which says “F2” under “Degree of Crime” is hereby changed to “F3”. No other error alleged by appellant merits discussion — not that a typographical error in a judgment is such error which merits all the time and effort expected in the appellate court for correction. Appellant, through any of his state-paid lawyers, could have and should have raised that defect below.

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; JUDGMENT CORRECTED.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and SHARP, J„ concur.

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

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction of burglary of a structure and grand theft. Burglary of an unoccupied non-dwelling structure is a third-degree felony. Because this is what the appellant was charged with and found guilty of, the typographical error in the judgment which says “F2” under “Degree of Crime” is hereby changed to “F3”. No other error alleged by appellant merits discussion — not that a typographical error in a judgment is such error which merits all the time and effort expected in the appellate court for correction. Appellant, through any of his state-paid lawyers, could have and should have raised that defect below.

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; JUDGMENT CORRECTED.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and SHARP, J„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

502 So. 2d 99, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 490, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-v-state-fladistctapp-1987.