Wood v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wood v. State

682 So. 2d 1217, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12127, 1996 WL 670457

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 19, 1996

DocketNo. 95-4525

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 682 So. 2d 1217 (Wood v. State) 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

Wood v. State, 682 So. 2d 1217, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12127, 1996 WL 670457 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Livingston Wood (Wood) challenges the trial court’s revocation of his probation and the sentence imposed thereon. His appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). After reviewing the record, we agree with his counsel that there are no meritorious issues for appeal except for an error warranting remand of the written revocation order with instructions.

Wood was charged with violating three conditions of his probation, yet only one was discussed and proven at the hearing. Nevertheless, the written revocation order stated Wood violated “conditions of his probation as cited” in the affidavit of violation. Accordingly, we remand for entry of a written order setting forth the specific conditions of proba[1218]*1218tion which the trial court orally found Wood violated. Martin v. State, 674 So.2d 906 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)(remanding for entry of written order conforming to oral pronouncement); Cue v. State, 619 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)(remanding for entry of written order reflecting specific terms and conditions of probation violated).

We affirm the revocation of probation and sentence imposed in all other respects.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED.

MINER, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Livingston Wood (Wood) challenges the trial court’s revocation of his probation and the sentence imposed thereon. His appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). After reviewing the record, we agree with his counsel that there are no meritorious issues for appeal except for an error warranting remand of the written revocation order with instructions.

Wood was charged with violating three conditions of his probation, yet only one was discussed and proven at the hearing. Nevertheless, the written revocation order stated Wood violated “conditions of his probation as cited” in the affidavit of violation. Accordingly, we remand for entry of a written order setting forth the specific conditions of proba[1218]*1218tion which the trial court orally found Wood violated. Martin v. State, 674 So.2d 906 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)(remanding for entry of written order conforming to oral pronouncement); Cue v. State, 619 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)(remanding for entry of written order reflecting specific terms and conditions of probation violated).

We affirm the revocation of probation and sentence imposed in all other respects.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED.

MINER, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

682 So. 2d 1217, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 12127, 1996 WL 670457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wood-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack