Williams v. State

663 So. 2d 15, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12493, 1995 WL 700234
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Williams v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 618 So. 2d 773
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 29, 1995·No. No. 95-1002·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Randall Williams appeals a restitution order imposed as a condition of probation. The State concedes that the order is in error because the installment payments exceed the length of defendant’s probation. See § 775.089(3)(b)l., Fla.Stat. (1993); Starks v. State, 658 So.2d 183, 183-84 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Brown v. State, 645 So.2d 1066, 1067 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We therefore reverse the restitution order and remand for entry of an order consistent with the statute. As pointed out by the defendant, the probation order should also be corrected to reflect that the plea was nolo contendere rather than guilty. There is no merit to the other points on appeal.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

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

Williams v. State, 663 So. 2d 15, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12493, 1995 WL 700234 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

663 So. 2d 15 (Williams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. State
645 So. 2d 1066 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Starks v. State
658 So. 2d 183 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)