D.F., Jr. v. State, 93-03211
| Decision Date | 22 February 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-03211,93-03211 |
| Citation | 650 So.2d 1097 |
| Parties | 20 Fla. L. Weekly D521 D.F., Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Stephen M. Martin, Lakeland, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Ann P. Corcoran, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
The appellant, D.F., Jr., challenges an order adjudicating him delinquent and sentencing him as a serious or habitual juvenile offender pursuant to section 39.01(46)(a), Florida Statutes (1993). We find no merit in the appellant's contentions and, accordingly, affirm the trial court's adjudication and its determination that the appellant qualified as a serious or habitual juvenile offender.
We must remand, however, for the purpose of correcting a scrivener's error in the court's written order. At the appellant's hearing, the court found the appellant guilty of aggravated battery with a weapon, a first degree felony. Secs. 784.045, 775.087(1)(b), Fla.Stat. (1993). The court's written order indicates that he was found guilty of aggravated battery, a second degree felony. Sec. 784.045. When there is a difference between a court's oral pronouncement and a written order, the oral pronouncement controls. Reber v. State, 611 So.2d 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Upon remand, the court should correct the written order to reflect that the appellant was found guilty of a first degree felony.
Remanded with instructions.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wilkinson v. Wilkinson, Case No. 5D14-4285
...522, 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)); Y.G. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 830 So. 2d 212, 213 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (citing D.F., Jr. v. State, 650 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); N.M. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 785 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)). Further, the oral ruling and the written judg......
-
Wilkinson v. Wilkinson, 5D14–4285.
...522, 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) ); Y.G. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 830 So.2d 212, 213 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (citing D.F., Jr. v. State, 650 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) ; N.M. v. Dep't of Children & Families, 785 So.2d 530 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) ).Further, the oral ruling and the written judgm......
-
Denson v. State, 97-00611
...in the written sentence clearly violates the rule that the written sentence must conform to the oral pronouncement. See D.F. v. State, 650 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Prior to the Criminal Appeal Reform Act, we would have ordered the trial court to correct both of these errors, even thou......
-
BC v. Department of Children and Families, 5D03-1680.
...is a difference between the court's oral pronouncement and its written order, the oral pronouncement controls. See D.F., Jr. v. State, 650 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). The Department concedes that the scrivener's error should be corrected to reflect the agreement of the parties and the co......