Sullivan v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sullivan v. State

701 So. 2d 657, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 13135, 1997 WL 716784

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 19, 1997

DocketNo. 97-0621

StatusPublished

This text of 701 So. 2d 657 (Sullivan 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

Sullivan v. State, 701 So. 2d 657, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 13135, 1997 WL 716784 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was placed on probation for aggravated battery. He now challenges the trial court’s order revoking his probation. We affirm the trial court’s order, but remand for the limited purpose of correcting two scrivener’s errors.

Appellant originally entered a plea of no contest, but he later withdrew his plea and-the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing. The administrative probation order, however, reflects that Appellant entered a plea of no contest to the probation violation charge. Accordingly, we remand to the trial court to correct the record to reflect that Appellant was found guilty of violating his probation after the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing. See Morgan v. State, 696 So.2d 850 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

Moreover, the final order on Appellant’s conviction for aggravated battery reflects that Appellant was adjudicated guilty, while Appellant’s probation order reflects that adjudication of guilt was withheld. On our record, we cannot discern which record document is accurate. Therefore, on remand, the trial court should also amend the record to correct this apparent inconsistency so that the record accurately reflects whether Appellant’s adjudication of guilt was withheld on his aggravated battery conviction.

As to all other issues raised in this appeal, we affirm.

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

GLICKSTEIN, GUNTHER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was placed on probation for aggravated battery. He now challenges the trial court’s order revoking his probation. We affirm the trial court’s order, but remand for the limited purpose of correcting two scrivener’s errors.

Appellant originally entered a plea of no contest, but he later withdrew his plea and-the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing. The administrative probation order, however, reflects that Appellant entered a plea of no contest to the probation violation charge. Accordingly, we remand to the trial court to correct the record to reflect that Appellant was found guilty of violating his probation after the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing. See Morgan v. State, 696 So.2d 850 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

Moreover, the final order on Appellant’s conviction for aggravated battery reflects that Appellant was adjudicated guilty, while Appellant’s probation order reflects that adjudication of guilt was withheld. On our record, we cannot discern which record document is accurate. Therefore, on remand, the trial court should also amend the record to correct this apparent inconsistency so that the record accurately reflects whether Appellant’s adjudication of guilt was withheld on his aggravated battery conviction.

As to all other issues raised in this appeal, we affirm.

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

GLICKSTEIN, GUNTHER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

701 So. 2d 657, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 13135, 1997 WL 716784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sullivan-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack