Viera v. State

218 So. 3d 511, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 7812
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Viera v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 5039
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 31, 2017·No. No. 3D15-1604·Published

Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING OR FOR WRITTEN OPINION

PER CURIAM.

We deny the appellant’s motion for rehearing, but grant his motion for written opinion, withdraw our per curiam affir-mance issued on April 26, 2017, and substitute the following opinion in its place.

We affirm the defendant’s convictions and sentences for aggravated battery, see Boyd v. State, 910 So.2d 167 (Fla. 2005), but remand the cause to the trial court for the sole purpose of entering a written competency order nunc pro tunc. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.212(b); Mullens v. State, 197 So.3d 16 (Fla. 2016); Dougherty v. State, 149 So.3d 672 (Fla. 2014).

Affirmed and remanded with directions.

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

Viera v. State, 218 So. 3d 511, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 7812 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

218 So. 3d 511 (Viera v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Boyd v. State
910 So. 2d 167 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2005)
Bernard J. Dougherty v. State of Florida
149 So. 3d 672 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2014)
Khadafy Kareem Mullens v. State of Florida
197 So. 3d 16 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2016)