From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reddick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Dec 5, 2001
802 So. 2d 421 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Opinion

No. 3D01-1181

Opinion filed December 5, 2001.

An Appeal under Fla.R.App.P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Maria E. Dennis, Judge. Lower Tribunal No. 99-29579.

Edward Reddick, in proper person. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before JORGENSON, LEVY and GODERICH, JJ.


The defendant, Edward Reddick, filed a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The record refutes the claims raised by the defendant, and therefore, we affirm the denial of the motion for post-conviction relief. However, as the State properly concedes, the portion of the written sentencing order that provides that the two twenty-five year sentences are to run consecutively does not conform to the trial court's oral pronouncements that the sentences are to run concurrently. Therefore, we vacate that portion of the sentencing order, and remand for entry of written sentencing order that conforms to the trial court's oral pronouncements. Alvarez v. State, 698 So.2d 1377 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.


Summaries of

Reddick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Dec 5, 2001
802 So. 2d 421 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
Case details for

Reddick v. State

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD REDDICK, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Dec 5, 2001

Citations

802 So. 2d 421 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing Cases

Reddick v. Petrovksy

The state filed a one-page response on July 23, 2001. The trial court denied Petitioner's third and final…

Melton v. State

We reverse the order to the extent that it denies defendant's claim that his written sentence does not…