Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 28, 1995No. 94-00121PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We affirm Gregory Mitchell’s conviction for robbery, but we remand the ease because the written sentences do not comport with the trial court’s oral pronouncement. The probationary terms in case numbers 93-376F, 93-378F, and 93-379F must run concurrently to reflect the trial court’s pronouncement that Mitchell serve a total of ten years’ probation. We also note that the trial court must structure the sentences so that Mitchell is not ordered to serve a prison sentence and a probationary term simultaneously. See Cox v. State, 468 So.2d 437, 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).

PATTERSON, A.C.J., and BLUE…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Cox v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Warren L. Oliver v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API