Justin Lee Mc Daniel v. State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledNovember 17, 2021
Docket2D19-3134
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
JUSTIN LEE MCDANIEL,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
No. 2D19-3134
November 17, 2021
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Nick
Nazaretian and Barbara Twine Thomas, Judges.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Blair Allen, Assistant
Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and
Linsey Sims-Bohnenstiehl, Assistant Attorney General,
Tampa, for Appellee.
KHOUZAM, Judge.
Justin Lee McDaniel appeals the revocation of his probation
and the resulting sentences for burglary of an unoccupied dwelling,
grand theft of a motor vehicle, and grand theft. We affirm in all
respects except we reverse the revocation order to correct a
scrivener's error.
McDaniel points out, and the State appropriately concedes,
that the order of revocation failed to conform to the court's oral
findings at the evidentiary hearing. At the hearing, the circuit court
found McDaniel "in violation of Condition Five and of the special
condition of no contact." But, in contrast, the order of revocation
states that McDaniel "admitted to be in violation of Condition #5."
While this appeal was pending, the circuit court granted McDaniel's
motion to correct sentencing error and amended the judgment and
sentence to reflect that McDaniel was found in violation of condition
number five as well as the no contact order. However, no amended
order of revocation appears to have been entered. Accordingly, we
must reverse the revocation order to the extent that it does not
conform to the circuit court's oral findings and remand for the
correction of this scrivener's error. See Algiere v. State, 309 So. 3d
322, 324-25 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (affirming revocation of probation
and resulting sentences and remanding for entry of an amended
revocation order to correct the condition appellant was found to
2
have violated as well as the inaccurate statement that appellant had
admitted to the violation); Torres v. State, 244 So. 3d 417, 418 (Fla.
2d DCA 2018) ("[W]e reverse the revocation order to the extent that
it incorrectly states that Mr. Torres admitted the violations, and we
remand for the trial court to correct this scrivener's error.").
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded with instructions.
CASANUEVA and LABRIT, JJ., Concur.
__________________________
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
3