From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

O'Neal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 13, 1990
566 So. 2d 375 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

Opinion

No. 89-2533.

September 13, 1990.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County; Richard F. Conrad, Judge.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Michael S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Barbara C. Davis and Anthony J. Golden, Asst. Attys. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.


This is an Anders appeal. The defendant was sentenced by oral pronouncement to 14 months' incarceration on each of two counts. Both sentences were to run concurrently. However, the written sentencing order imposed a 24 month prison sentence on each count rather than 14 months. The State does not concede that the written sentencing order is in error. See Lester v. State, 563 So.2d 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Because there is a factual dispute as to which sentence the judge actually intended, we vacate the sentence and remand to the trial judge for resolution of this conflict.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; and REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.

DAUKSCH, GOSHORN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

O'Neal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 13, 1990
566 So. 2d 375 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)
Case details for

O'Neal v. State

Case Details

Full title:JASON TRAVIS O'NEAL, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Sep 13, 1990

Citations

566 So. 2d 375 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

Citing Cases

Poole v. State

The state contends that, according to the transcript, it is apparent that the trial court was assessing a…

Hollingsworth v. State

There appears, therefore, to be a factual dispute as to what the sentencing judge actually intended, and we…