Bell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 14, 2014

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2014-11-14

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 2019

5 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[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.”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Timothy Brown v. State, 275 So. 3d 830 - Dunn v. State

Relies on Martin v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2014-11-14

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Claude 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).

¶2AFFIRMED in part; and REMANDED.

LAWSON, EVANDER and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.