green
Positive treatment
22.5 score
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Walter Morris Hart v. State of Florida
Id. (first citing Martin v. State, 87 So. 3d 813, 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), and then citing Bell v. State, 150 So. 3d 1214, 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)). 2 We note that the trial court’s order would have been legally sufficient had it been issued timely.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
GREGORY STICKNEY v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Martin v. State, 87 So. 3d 813, 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Bell v. State, 150 So. 3d 1214, 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Timothy Brown v. State
Arnone v. State, 204 So.3d 556, 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (citing Martin v. State, 87 So.3d 813, 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Bell v. State, 150 So.3d 1214, 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Arnone v. State
Martin v. State, 87 So.3d 813, 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Bell v. State, 150 So.3d 1214, 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dunn v. State
See Arnone v. State , 204 So. 3d 556 , 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ("[W]here a court orally pronounces a reason, consistent with one or more of the factors listed under section 948.06(8)(e)1[.] for its finding that the defendant, as a violent felony offender of special concern, poses a danger to the community, but fails to provide written reasons for its finding, the proper remedy is to affirm the revocation of the defendant's probation, but remand for entry of a written order conforming to the court's oral pronouncement." (citing Bell v. State , 150 So. 3d 1214 , 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) ; Martin…
discussed
Cited "see"
Dunn v. State
See Arnone v. State , 204 So. 3d 556 , 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ("[W]here a court orally pronounces a reason, consistent with one or more of the factors listed under section 948.06(8)(e)1[.] for its finding that the defendant, as a violent felony offender of special concern, poses a danger to the community, but fails to provide written reasons for its finding, the proper remedy is to affirm the revocation of the defendant's probation, but remand for entry of a written order conforming to the court's oral pronouncement." (citing Bell v. State , 150 So. 3d 1214 , 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) ; Martin…
discussed
Cited "see"
Sean Wells v. State
See Bell v. State, 150 So. 3d 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014); see also Arnone v. State, 204 So. 3d 556, 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (“[W]here a court orally pronounces a reason, consistent with one or more of the factors listed under section 948.06(8)(e)1., for its finding that the defendant, as a violent felony offender of special concern, poses a danger to the community, but fails to provide written reasons for its finding, the proper remedy is to affirm the revocation of the defendant’s probation, but remand for entry of a written order conforming to the court’s oral pronouncement.”).
Claude Dwayne BELL
v.
STATE of Florida
v.
STATE of Florida
No. 5D14-922.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Nov 14, 2014.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Ailene S. Rogers, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant., Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marjorie Vincent-Tripp, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Evander, Lambert, Lawson.
Cited by 7 opinions | Published
Claude Dwayne Bell appeals the final order revoking his community control and sentencing him to serve 15 years in the Department of Corrections as a violent felony offender of special concern. At the conclusion of his sentencing hearing, the trial court orally pronounced that Bell posed a danger to the community. See § 948.06(8)(e), Florida Statutes (2013). However, its written order is not consistent with the oral pronouncement. Accordingly, we affirm the revocation of Bell’s community control, but remand for correction of the written order to conform to the oral pronouncement. See Martin v. State, 87 So.3d 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012).
AFFIRMED in part; and REMANDED.