02-0325 LOPEZ V. STATE

State: Florida

Court: Florida Third District Court

Docket No: 02-0325 LOPEZ V. STATE

Case Date: 12/26/2002

Preview:NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, A.D. 2002

RAYMOND LOPEZ, Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

** ** ** ** CASE NO. 3D02-325

LOWER ** TRIBUNAL NOS. 99-6743 98-4124 98-9720 Opinion filed December 26, 2002. An appeal conducted pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Ronald Dresnick, Judge. Raymond Lopez, in proper person. Richard E. Doran, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, GERSTEN and SHEVIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Raymond sentences Lopez appeals in his revocation County of probation Court and case

imposed

Miami-Dade

Circuit

numbers 98-4124, 98-9720, and 99-6743.

We affirm.

Defendant-appellant Lopez was placed on probation in the above three cases. Thereafter an affidavit of violation of

probation was filed, charging the defendant with fleeing and eluding a police officer, reckless driving, and other

violations.

After the conclusion of the arresting officer's

testimony at the violation of probation hearing, the defendant entered a plea bargain for a twelve-year term. The trial court imposed a twelve-year sentence in circuit court case number 99-6743, a five-year term in circuit court case number 98-4124 (concurrent with the sentence in circuit court case number 99-6743), and a five-year term in circuit court case number 98-9720, consecutive to the sentence in

circuit court case number 98-4124 (concurrent with the sentence in circuit court case number 99-6743). The written sentencing order in circuit court case number 98-9720 does not conform to the oral pronouncement. include the provision that the sentence be It does not to

consecutive

circuit court case number 98-4124. circuit court case number 98-9720

We therefore remand in for correction of the

sentencing order. Appointed counsel has filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The appellant has filed a pro se brief in which he argues

2

that the sentences are illegal.

The defendant contends that the

sentences imposed upon revocation of probation cannot exceed the original incorrect. two-year probationary term. The defendant is

See

Download 02-0325 LOPEZ V. STATE.pdf