Filed: Oct. 30, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA TREY HARRIS, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND Appellant, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED v. CASE NO. 1D17-1476 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _/ Opinion filed October 31, 2017. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County. Timothy A. Register, Judge. Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. No appearance for Appellee. PER CURIAM. In this Ander
Summary: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA TREY HARRIS, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND Appellant, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED v. CASE NO. 1D17-1476 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _/ Opinion filed October 31, 2017. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County. Timothy A. Register, Judge. Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. No appearance for Appellee. PER CURIAM. In this Anders..
More
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
TREY HARRIS, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
Appellant, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
v. CASE NO. 1D17-1476
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed October 31, 2017.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County.
Timothy A. Register, Judge.
Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender,
Tallahassee, for Appellant.
No appearance for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders * appeal, we affirm Appellant’s judgment and sentence, but
remand for the trial court to correct two scrivener’s errors in the order revoking his
*
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967).
probation. Although Appellant was on probation for one count of grand theft, the
revocation order states that he was on probation for two counts of grand theft.
Additionally, while the State alleged, and the trial court orally pronounced its
finding, that Appellant violated Conditions 5 and 6 of his probation by committing
one new law offense and associating with a person engaged in criminal activity,
respectively, the revocation order states that he violated his probation “[b]y violating
Condition 5 by committing new law offenses.” We, therefore, remand for the trial
court to correct the revocation order. See Williams v. State,
138 So. 3d 1102, 1103
(Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (affirming a judgment and sentence in an Anders appeal, but
remanding for the trial court to correct the revocation order to conform to its oral
pronouncement as to which alleged violations supported revocation); see
also Nickolas v. State,
66 So. 3d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Washington v. State,
37
So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). Appellant need not be present. See
Williams, 138
So. 3d at 1103.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED.
LEWIS, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
2