07-5838 DAVID HARDER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA

State: Florida

Court: Florida First District Court

Docket No: 07-5838

Case Date: 07/13/2009

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

DAVID HARDER, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________/ Opinion filed July 13, 2009.

CASE NO. 1D07-5838

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Jack M. Schemer, Judge. Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Pamela D. Presnell, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. The appellant, David Harder, challenges the trial court's written probation order. The appellant argues that the order contradicted the trial court's oral

pronouncement at sentencing and that electronic monitoring was not mandated by statute. We agree and reverse and remand accordingly. We affirm on all other

issues without further discussion. On May 30, 1996, the appellant was convicted of custodial sexual battery and was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment to be followed by five years' probation. On June 11, 1996, the trial court entered a written probation order. Subsequently, the trial court revoked the appellant's probation and sentenced him to 17 years' imprisonment. The appellant challenged his sentence, arguing that the scoresheet improperly assessed points for events unsupported by the record. On the previous appeal, we agreed with the appellant and reversed and remanded for resentencing. See Harder v. State, 951 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). On remand, the trial court resentenced the appellant to 47.5 months' imprisonment to be followed by four years' probation. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court pronounced that: The same conditions of probation, it would be the sex offender probation that were [sic] previously imposed, will remain in full force and effect. . . . It's the court's intent that the conditions of probation previously imposed will remain in full force and effect. *** I'm also of the understanding that mandatory monitoring would not apply because this was way before. . . . Also, I placed Mr. Harder on probation with the same conditions that were previously imposed. The special conditions that were previously imposed . . . when you were originally placed on probation were the general conditions of probation, and also the special condition that you submit to a psychosexual evaluation and follow through with any recommended 2

treatment, and that would be the court would be

Download 07-5838 DAVID HARDER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA.pdf