Terry James Townsend v. State of Florida

271 So. 3d 1249
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 30, 2019
Docket18-0722
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 271 So. 3d 1249 (Terry James Townsend v. State of Florida) 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
Terry James Townsend v. State of Florida, 271 So. 3d 1249 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

No. 1D18-0722 _____________________________

TERRY JAMES TOWNSEND,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee. _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County. John F. Simon, Judge.

May 30, 2019

PER CURIAM.

This direct criminal appeal was brought pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Having reviewed the entire record, we affirm the trial court’s revocation of Appellant’s probation and the resulting judgment and sentence. However, we remand for correction of a scrivener’s error in the Order of Revocation of Probation, which states, inter alia, that Appellant violated conditions of probation (1) and (5) as alleged in charges VI, VII, and VIII, and that Appellant admitted to those violations. The record reflects that Appellant admitted to violating special condition (2) as alleged in charges I-V. It does not reflect that Appellant admitted to violating conditions (1) and (5) as alleged in charges VI, VII, or VIII, nor did the trial court find at the violation of probation hearing that Appellant violated those conditions. The record also does not reflect that the state attempted to demonstrate a basis to revoke as to those conditions. Rather, the inclusion of those conditions in the order of revocation appears to be a scrivener’s error. See Kemp v. State, 135 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). On remand, the Order of Revocation of Probation should be corrected to reflect that the revocation is based on the condition of Appellant’s probation that he admitted to violating.

MAKAR, OSTERHAUS, and BILBREY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

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

Related

Brett Alan Boyce v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2024

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
271 So. 3d 1249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terry-james-townsend-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2019.