You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

R.S. v. State

Citations: 664 So. 2d 1113; 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12717; 1995 WL 733061Docket: No. 94-02474

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; December 12, 1995; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal concerning the sentencing order issued by the trial court. The appellant's counsel submitted a brief under Anders v. California, outlining three potential issues for appeal. The appellate court identified two substantial issues: a discrepancy in the restitution amount and an improperly imposed special condition of community control. Initially, the trial court ordered a restitution of $93.80, but the written documentation erroneously stated $104.75. The court ordered a correction to the restitution amount to reflect the accurate figure. Furthermore, a condition barring the appellant from possessing weapons without prior approval from a counselor was invalidated, as it was not pronounced during sentencing. This decision was supported by the precedent set in Malone v. State. All other aspects of the adjudication and disposition were affirmed. The court also rejected the appellant's argument concerning the application of previously imposed community control conditions to the new community control, referencing Jones v. State and Olvey v. State as supportive case law. The decision was concurred by Judges Schoonover and Patterson.

Legal Issues Addressed

Imposition of Special Conditions in Sentencing

Application: The court struck down a special condition of community control that was not verbally pronounced during sentencing, citing it as improperly imposed.

Reasoning: A condition prohibiting the appellant from possessing weapons without prior counselor permission was deemed erroneous, as it was not stated during sentencing and was therefore struck down, citing Malone v. State.

Restitution Order Discrepancy

Application: The court identified an inconsistency between the restitution amount stated in court and the amount documented in the written order, requiring correction to reflect the accurate amount.

Reasoning: The trial court originally ordered restitution of $93.80, but the written order incorrectly stated $104.75. The court mandated correction to reflect the accurate restitution amount.

Validity of Community Control Conditions

Application: The court dismissed the appellant's challenge regarding previous community control conditions applying to the new control, finding no merit in the argument.

Reasoning: It dismissed the appellant's claim regarding the trial court's advisement that previously imposed community control conditions would apply to the new community control, finding it without merit, referencing Jones v. State and Olvey v. State.