Zambrana v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Zambrana v. State

906 So. 2d 330, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10474, 2005 WL 1559681

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 6, 2005·No. No. 3D04-2209·Published

Opinion

ROTHENBERG, Judge.

The defendant appeals the trial court’s denial of her motion for clarification of the sentences imposed in case numbers 99-25569 and 01-25865(A) which she claims should reflect the imposition of concurrent sentences. As the trial court has subsequently conformed the written judgments and sentences to reflect its oral pronouncement and has now corrected the sentences to run concurrent, we conclude that the defendant’s appeal is now moot.

Appeal dismissed as moot.

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

ROTHENBERG, Judge.

The defendant appeals the trial court’s denial of her motion for clarification of the sentences imposed in case numbers 99-25569 and 01-25865(A) which she claims should reflect the imposition of concurrent sentences. As the trial court has subsequently conformed the written judgments and sentences to reflect its oral pronouncement and has now corrected the sentences to run concurrent, we conclude that the defendant’s appeal is now moot.

Appeal dismissed as moot.

Zambrana v. State, 906 So. 2d 330, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10474, 2005 WL 1559681 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

906 So. 2d 330 (Zambrana v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.