Wilson v. State

638 So. 2d 197, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5997, 1994 WL 267902
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wilson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 596 So. 2d 775
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 20, 1994·No. No. 93-84·Published

Opinion

ALLEN, Judge.

The appellant was placed on probation for certain criminal offenses, and he now challenges various conditions of this probation. As in Martin v. State, 618 So.2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993), the Bay County Work Program payment must be stricken as there was no statutory authority for this assessment. And because the written orders must conform to the court’s oral pronouncement, e.g., True-blood v. State, 635 So.2d 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), the monthly First Step payment must be amended to require only a one-time payment. The state concedes error as to these matters, and we reverse the challenged orders in this regard. The orders are otherwise affirmed, and the cause is remanded.

BARFIELD and WOLF, JJ., concur.

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

Wilson v. State, 638 So. 2d 197, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5997, 1994 WL 267902 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

638 So. 2d 197 (Wilson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Trueblood v. State
635 So. 2d 1024 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Martin v. State
618 So. 2d 737 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)