Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

651 So. 2d 759

Wells v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1995-03-06

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 2003

1 state decisions

Relies on Maddox v. State · Cue v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1995-03-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1In this appeal from an order revoking probation, appellant argues that the case must be remanded so that the trial court may correct its order to reflect the violations which it found had been established by the evidence. The state agrees that a remand is required. Accordingly, we affirm the order revoking appellant’s probation, but remand with directions that the trial court enter an amended order specifying the violations found by the trial court to have been established by the evidence. E.g., Cue v. State, *760619 So.2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Maddox v. State, 619 So.2d 473 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).

¶2AFFIRMED and REMANDED, with directions.

WEBSTER, MICKLE and BENTON, JJ., concur.
/651/so2d/759 · .json · Public domain