Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

843 So. 2d 969

Curry v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2003-04-23

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 2003

1 state decisions

Relies on Anders v. California · 766 So. 2d 1036 - Richardson v. Richardson · 506 So. 2d 88 - Cornett v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2003-04-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1This direct criminal appeal of the judgment and sentences imposed upon the appellant is brought pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). The appellant pled guilty to a third-degree felony in one case, and admitted that the third-degree felony violated his existing community control in another case. Both cases were consolidated for the purposes of this appeal.

¶2Upon our independent examination of the entire record, we agree that' no reversible error occurred in either case. We affirm both the appellant’s sentence as to the new law violation as well as the revocation of community control and the sentence imposed thereon. However, because the record does not contain a written order of revocation of community control, we remand to the trial court for entry of a written order of revocation. See Harvard v. State, 766 So.2d 1043, 1043 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), citing Cornett v. State, 506 So.2d 88 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and Givens v. State, 666 So.2d 235 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

¶3AFFIRMED.

KAHN, VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ. CONCUR.
/843/so2d/969 · .json · Public domain