Whitehead v. State
561 So. 2d 35, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3531, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1434
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Whitehead v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 7361 →
Opinion
The parties are in agreement that we must remand with direction that the trial court correct its written order to conform to its oral pronouncement that:
I’m gonna sentence you to a term of three years concurrent with Count I, consecutive to any other active sentence you’re doing from Palm Beach County or anywhere else.
Accordingly, we do so, which action is consistent with Mendoza Madoses v. State, 511 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Evans v. State, 490 So.2d 1071 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); and Kelly v. State, 414 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Whitehead v. State, 561 So. 2d 35, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3531, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1434 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).
561 So. 2d 35 (Whitehead v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Mendoza Madoses v. State
511 So. 2d 1132 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Kelly v. State
414 So. 2d 1117 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Evans v. State
490 So. 2d 1071 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)