From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Joseph v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 5, 1993
616 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

No. 91-3961.

April 5, 1993.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Duval County, David Wiggins, J.

Kathryn L. Sands, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Laura Rush, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.


In this direct criminal appeal, appellant raises two issues: whether it was error to deny his motion to suppress evidence, because the state failed to establish that his consent to search was given intelligently and voluntarily; and whether the written sentence imposed should be corrected because it is inconsistent with the trial court's oral sentence. We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to suppress. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction. However, we agree that the written sentence is inconsistent with the trial court's oral sentence, because it omits any reference to either a $50,000.00 fine or $220.00 in court costs, both of which were included in the oral sentence. Accordingly, we reverse the sentence, and remand with directions that the trial court correct the written sentence to correspond to its oral pronouncement.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.

ERVIN, BARFIELD and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Joseph v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 5, 1993
616 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

Joseph v. State

Case Details

Full title:GERARD JOSEPH, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Apr 5, 1993

Citations

616 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Scott v. State

In addition, the sentence for disorderly conduct shows an award of more jail credit than was orally…

AGO

Thus, a court waiving the assessment must specifically announce such waiver, detailing the reasons for such…