“if a 162 discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement. ashley v. state, 850 so.2d 1265, 1268 (fla.2003).”
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Denizard v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2012 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote
· confidence high
if a 162 discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement. ashley v. state, 850 so.2d 1265, 1268 (fla.2003).
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Barnes v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote
· confidence high
if a discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
John Wayne Ballester v. State of Florida
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
Ordinarily, “when such a discrepancy exists, ‘the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement.’” Rowan v. State, 394 So. 3d 634 , 635 (Fla. 6th DCA 2024) (quoting Guerra v. State, 927 So. 2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
JONATHAN WILLIAM ROWAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
And, when such a discrepancy exists, “the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement.” Guerra v. State, 927 So. 2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); see Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600, 603 (Fla. 2007) (“This Court has held that a court’s oral pronouncement of a sentence controls over 2 the written sentencing document.”).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
R.L.F. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
The disposition order reflects that the trial court imposed a total of $200 in costs and fees, whereas the trial court's oral pronouncement of sentence imposed a total of $150 in "court costs." See W.S.G. v. State, 32 So. 3d 725, 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) ("If a discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement." (quoting Guerra v. State, 927 So. 2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006))).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
R.L.F. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
The disposition order reflects that the trial court imposed a total of $200 in costs and fees, whereas the trial court’s oral pronouncement of sentence imposed a total of $150 in “court costs.” See W.S.G. v. State, 32 So.3d 725, 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (“If a discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement.” (quoting Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006))).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
W.S.G. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
We find the juvenile court erred because “[i]f a discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement.” Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); see also N.L. v. State, 4 So.3d 1286, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (reversing a disposition order that failed to comport to the juvenile court’s oral pronouncement and remanding for the limited purpose of entering a corrected disposition order).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
WSG v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
We find the juvenile court erred because "[i]f a discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement." Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); see also N.L. v. State, 4 So.3d 1286, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (reversing a disposition order that failed to comport to the juvenile court's oral pronouncement and remanding for the limited purpose of entering a corrected disposition order).
discussed
Cited "see"
C.M. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See W.S.G. v. State, 32 So. 3d 725, 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) ("If a discrepancy exists between the written [disposition] and the oral pronouncement, the written [disposition] must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement." (quoting Guerra v. State, 927 So. 2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006))).
discussed
Cited "see"
C.M. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See W.S.G. v. State, 32 So.3d 725, 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (“If a discrepancy exists between the written [disposition] and the oral pronouncement, the written [disposition] must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement.” (quoting Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006))).
cited
Cited "see"
Walker v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
White v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“The postconviction court did not address the issue of whether the written sentence conformed to the oral pronouncement!)] ...
discussed
Cited "see"
Torres v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that if a discrepancy exists, the written sentence must be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement).
cited
Cited "see"
Lanterman v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Johnson v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Guerra v. State, 927 So.2d 248, 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).