Legal Opinion

Southerland v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 11, 2009No. 5D09-332Published

1Per curiam

We affirm the trial court’s order revoking Southerland’s probation. The trial court had the inherent authority to vacate its prior order which was entered without notice to the State. See State v. Burton, 814 So.2d 136 (Fla.1975) (trial court had inherent authority to vacate order which was product of fraud, collusion, deceit, or mistake); State v. Brooks, 161 Ariz. 177, 777 P.2d 675 (1989) (trial court had inherent authority to vacate order purporting to terminate probation where order was entered as result of mistake or inadvertence). Furthermore, we see no reason why the trial court could…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. BrooksCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1989
  2. Rho-Sigma, Inc. v. International Control & Lower Measurements, Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API