Dantler v. State, 584 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). · Go Syfert
Search
Dantler v. State, 584 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Long v. State (fladistctapp, 2004-11-10)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Long v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
See Williams v. State, 604 So.2d 8, 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) ("Written sentencing documents, including probation orders, must conform to the trial court's oral pronouncements."); see also Hamer v. State, 682 So.2d 1221, 1221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Byrden v. State, 622 So.2d 139, 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Dantler v. State, 584 So.2d 198, 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (holding that the trial court's formal written order finding a probationer in violation of the terms and conditions of probation must conform to the oral pronouncements at the revocation hearing and sentencing) (citations omitted).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Gillyard v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1994 · confidence medium
Dantler v. State, 584 So.2d 198, 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Knight v. State, 566 So.2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Byrden v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1993 · confidence medium
Dantler v. State, 584 So.2d 198, 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
cited Cited "see" Moore v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dantler v. State, 584 So.2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Leon George DANTLER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
90-2510.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Aug 15, 1991.
584 So. 2d 198
Joanos.
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and Gail E. Anderson, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Amelia L. Beisner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

JOANOS, Chief Judge.

This is an appeal from an order revoking probation. Appellant contends the order is not supported by competent evidence, and that the trial court erred in failing to set forth in the probation order the specific conditions of probation found to have been violated. We affirm the order revoking probation, but remand for amendment of the order to reflect the specific terms and conditions of probation violated.

A trial court's formal written order finding the probationer in violation of the terms and conditions of probation must conform to the oral pronouncements at the revocation hearing and sentencing. Gardner v. State, 569 So.2d 532 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Earle v. State, 519 So.2d 757, 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Haynes v. State, 571 So.2d 1380 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Morris v.[*199] State, 563 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Donley v. State, 557 So.2d 943, 945 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). At the hearing in this cause, the trial court found appellant in violation of three conditions of probation. However, the order revoking probation fails to set forth the specific grounds for the revocation.

Accordingly, the order revoking appellant's probation is affirmed, but the cause is remanded with directions to enter a written order conforming to the court's oral pronouncements at the hearing.

WIGGINTON and KAHN, JJ., concur.