Filed: Jan. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT FORREST M. JOHNSON, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D13-4308 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed January 7, 2015. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Charles B. Curry, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Carol J.Y. Wilson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahasse
Summary: NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT FORREST M. JOHNSON, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D13-4308 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed January 7, 2015. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Charles B. Curry, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Carol J.Y. Wilson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee..
More
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
FORREST M. JOHNSON, )
)
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Case No. 2D13-4308
)
STATE OF FLORIDA, )
)
Appellee. )
)
Opinion filed January 7, 2015.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk
County; Charles B. Curry, Judge.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and
Carol J.Y. Wilson, Assistant Public
Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,
Tallahassee, for Appellee.
CASANUEVA, Judge.
We affirm Forrest M. Johnson's judgment and sentence in this Anders1
appeal. However, we remand for the trial court to correct an apparent scrivener's error
in the order revoking probation.
1
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967).
Johnson admitted to violating his probation, and his probation was
revoked based on the violations set forth in an amended affidavit of probation. The
amended affidavit alleged nine violations, including a violation of condition three for
changing his residence without the consent of the probation officer. The order of
revocation tracks the violations alleged in the amended affidavit but includes a violation
of condition thirteen, failure to report within seventy-two hours of release, and no
violation of condition three. No violation of condition thirteen was alleged or otherwise
at issue. Thus, it appears the trial court intended to include a violation of condition
three, not condition thirteen, in its order. Accordingly, we affirm Johnson's judgment
and sentence but remand for the trial court to correct the order revoking probation.
Affirmed and remanded.
DAVIS, C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., Concur.
-2-