From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cataldo v. State

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
Nov 28, 2018
257 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

Summary

stating appellant did not need to be present for court's entry of corrected order of probation that included three ministerial corrections

Summary of this case from O.H. v. State

Opinion

No. 4D17-1446

11-28-2018

Paul Anthony CATALDO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Benjamin Eisenberg, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kimberly T. Acuña, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Benjamin Eisenberg, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kimberly T. Acuña, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Kuntz, J.

Paul Anthony Cataldo appeals his conviction for battery on a person 65 years of age or older. We affirm without comment with one exception. Cataldo argues, and the State concedes, that the circuit court erred in denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct sentencing error.

Specifically, Cataldo argues there are three errors in the written order of probation:

1.) The order of probation incorrectly states that Cataldo entered a guilty plea when, in fact, he was convicted by jury;

2.) The order of probation refers to Cataldo's conviction on count one as "EVIDENCE OF PREJUDICE WHILE COMMITTING BATTERY ON PERSON 65 YEARS

OF AGE OR OLDER" when, in fact, the jury did not find evidence of prejudice; and

3.) The order of probation indicates a probationary period of "3 YEARS, CONCURRENT WITH COUNTS 1,2 – FIRST 6 MONTHS OF PROBATION TO BE SERVED ON COMMUNITY CONTROL II WITH A MONITOR" when, in fact, the court ordered one year of probation for count two.

The State concedes that these three errors should be corrected. Thus, we affirm Cataldo's conviction and sentence but remand for the court to correct the three errors in the order of probation. Cataldo need not be present for the court's entry of the corrected order of probation. See Sirota v. State , 977 So.2d 700, 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

Affirmed and remanded for correction of order of probation.

Taylor and Conner, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cataldo v. State

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
Nov 28, 2018
257 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

stating appellant did not need to be present for court's entry of corrected order of probation that included three ministerial corrections

Summary of this case from O.H. v. State
Case details for

Cataldo v. State

Case Details

Full title:PAUL ANTHONY CATALDO, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Court:DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

Date published: Nov 28, 2018

Citations

257 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

Citing Cases

O.H. v. State

Appellant does not need to be present for the entry of the corrected order. See Cataldo v. State, 257 So. 3d…