Peterson v. State, 730 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Peterson v. State, 730 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
21 citation events (9 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: PATRICIA DAGAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA (fladistctapp, 2019-04-17)
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999 2012 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) PATRICIA DAGAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
See Hendrix v. State, 224 So. 3d 823, 824 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (holding that a snapout cannot serve as a written competency order); Gray v. State, 198 So. 3d 780 , 782–83 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (holding that a snapout cannot serve as a written judgment or sentence); Phillips v. State, 198 So. 3d 789, 790 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016), Zaborowski v. State, 126 So. 3d 405 , 407 n.2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013), Thar v. State, 8 So. 3d 1204 , 1205 n.1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), and Cochrane v. State, 997 So. 2d 1221, 1223 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (Altenbernd, J., concurring) (each noting this court's longstanding discouragement of th…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Phillips v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
See Zaborowski v. State, 126 So.3d 405 , 407 n. 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013); Thar v. State, 8 So.3d 1204 , 1205 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Cochrane v. State, 997 So.2d 1221, 1223-24 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (Altenbernd, J., concurring); Woods v. State, 987 So.2d 669, 672 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Akridge v. Crow, 903 So.2d 346, 350-51 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Sutton v. State, 838 So.2d 616 , 617 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Heath v. State, 840 So.2d 307, 308-09 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Monroe v. State, 784 So.2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Richardson v. State, 761 So.2d 1232, 1233 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Monroe v. State, 760 So.…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Zaborowski v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
See Sutton v. State, 838 So.2d 616 , 617 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Heath v. State, 840 So.2d 307, 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Richardson v. State, 761 So.2d 1232, 1233 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Peterson v. State, 730 So.2d 830, 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Grantham v. State, 735 So.2d 525, 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Heath v. State (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · confidence medium
See Richardson v. State, 761 So.2d 1232 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Peterson v. State, 730 So.2d 830, 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Grantham v. State, 735 So.2d 525 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Holiday v. State (7×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. · 2000 · confidence medium
As stated above, the courts in Miller and Holiday reached different conclusions on this issue, see Miller, 723 So.2d at 354-55 (holding that trial court committed fundamental error by instructing the jury with the pre-modified standard instruction); Holiday, 730 So.2d at 830 (reaching opposite conclusion and certifying conflict with Miller ), and we are now called upon to resolve the conflict between those decisions.
cited Cited "see" Richardson v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Peterson v. State, 730 So.2d 830, 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (filed April 14, 1999); Grantham v. State, 735 So.2d 525, 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (filed May 14, 1999).
cited Cited "see" Monroe v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Peterson v. State, 730 So.2d 830, 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
Gregory H. PETERSON, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
98-01024.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Apr 14, 1999.
730 So. 2d 830
Altenbernd.
Cited by 9 opinions  |  Published

[*831] Ralph Barreira, Miami, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ann Pfeiffer Howe, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

ALTENBERND, Acting Chief Judge.

We affirm Gregory Peterson's convictions for possession of a counterfeit controlled substance and sale of such a substance. We comment only on the sentencing procedure in this case. We are concerned that the trial court's procedure of preparing only a sentencing memorandum when imprisonment is not imposed is a very unusual practice that may result in mischief.

At the sentencing hearing on March 6, 1998, the trial court initially sentenced Mr. Peterson to twenty-two months' imprisonment followed by three years of drug offender probation. Following a recess, this sentence was orally corrected to "one year in the Polk County jail." Although we are still uncertain, we believe that the period of probation initially imposed was deleted after the recess. If so, this sentence is now fully served.

Our record contains no sentence on a form comparable to any form in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.986. When this court ordered that the record be supplemented with the sentence so we could determine whether probation was imposed, we were informed by the Clerk of the Tenth Judicial Circuit that written sentences are only prepared in that circuit for sentences of state imprisonment. When a sentence imposes only probation or a term in the county jail, apparently this circuit is relying exclusively upon the "Memo of Sentence," also called a "snapout." This procedure makes it difficult for the appellate court to determine the sentence and to review the conditions of probation. We attach as an appendix the two sentencing documents created in this case to demonstrate the problem.

We have not been asked to reverse this sentence and we affirm this appeal. We caution the judges in the Tenth Circuit, however, that the procedure they apparently are utilizing on a regular basis may not always create an adequate record for review.

Affirmed.

WHATLEY and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.