From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Muro v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Dec 18, 1991
589 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 90-02197.

December 18, 1991.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Charles A. Davis, Jr., Judge.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and John S. Lynch, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Anne Y. Swing, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.


We affirm defendant's conviction for attempted possession of cocaine.

However, we agree with defendant that conditions 11, 12, 13, and 18 of the conditions of probation imposed in his sentence had not been orally pronounced by the trial court and are, therefore, not properly a part of the sentence. See Zachary v. State, 559 So.2d 105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).

We do not find merit in defendant's remaining contention concerning the award of fees and costs which had been agreed to by defendant as a part of his plea bargain.

The conviction is affirmed. The sentence is remanded for correction in accordance with this opinion.

RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Muro v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Dec 18, 1991
589 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

Muro v. State

Case Details

Full title:ESTEBAN MURO, JR., APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Dec 18, 1991

Citations

589 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

Knight v. State

Further, because that condition of probation had not been orally pronounced by the trial court, it is not…